Formative Evaluation UNICEF’S CHILD PROTECTION SYSTEM BUILDING APPROACH IN INDONESIA
UNICEF World Trade Center 6, 10th Floor Jl. Jenderal Sudirman Kav. 31 Jakarta 12920, Indonesia
Tel. (021) 2996 8000
Fax. (021) 571 1326
Email [email protected]
Website www.unicef.or.id
unicefindonesia @unicefindonesia
Formative Evaluation
UNICEF’s ChIld ProTECTIoN sysTEm BUIldINg APProACh IN INdoNEsIA
UNICEF World Trade Center 6, 10th Floor Jl. Jenderal Sudirman Kav. 31 Jakarta 12920, Indonesia
Tel. (021) 2996 8000
Fax. (021) 571 1326
Email [email protected]
Website www.unicef.or.id
unicefindonesia @unicefindonesia
Formative Evaluation
UNICEF’s ChIld ProTECTIoN sysTEm BUIldINg APProACh IN INdoNEsIA
3 | UNICEF INDONESIA 4 THE INDONESIAN STORY |Cover: © UNICEF Indonesia/2015/Nick Baker
1
Formative Evaluation
UNICEF’s Child Protection System Building Approach in Indonesia
IOD PARC
UNICEF
February 2015
2
Formative Evaluation of UNICEF’s Child Protection System Building Approach in Indonesia
Evaluation Team
Jo Kaybryn, IOD PARCGisela Ervin-Ward, IOD PARC AustralasiaKharisma Nugroho and Novina Suprobo, Migunani & Mberkahi
IOD PARC is the trading name of International Organisation Development Ltd Omega Court 362 Cemetery RoadSheffieldS11 8FT United Kingdom Tel: +44 114 267 3620 www.iodparc.com
Evaluation Manager
Peter Leth Chief of Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation UNICEF Indonesia Tel: +62 21 2996 8130 [email protected]
27 February 2015
3
ContentsAcknowledgements 5
List of Tables and Figures 6
Acronyms and Abbreviations 7
Executive Summary 9
1. Introduction 15
1.1. Background and rationale 15
1.2. Purpose and objective of the evaluation 16
1.3. Scope of the evaluation 17
1.4. Changes from the Terms of Reference 17
1.5. Criteria used for the evaluation 18
1.6. Key evaluation questions 19
2. Methodology 21
2.1. Responsibilities 21
2.2. Description of data collection methods and data sources 21
2.3. Limitations and constraints 23
3. Contextual Framing 27
3.1. The Indonesian context 27
3.2. Systems building approach in Indonesia 28
Findings 31
4. Theory of Change 31
5. Relevance 35
5.1. Defining relevance 35
5.2. Alignment with UNICEF child protection results and national priorities 35
5.3. Alignment with UNICEF’s global and regional equity agenda 38
5.4. Meeting the needs of building a child protection system 39
5.5. UNICEF’s role in building Indonesia’s child protection system 42
5.6. Perceptions of child protection and systems building 43
6. Effectiveness 47
6.1. Defining effectiveness 47
6.2. Child protection system outcomes (results) 47
6.3. Strengthening the elements of the Conceptual Framework 55
3
4
6.3.1. Social welfare systems for children and families 56
6.3.2. Justice system for children 61
6.3.3. Data and information management 61
6.3.4. Social and behavioural change system 64
6.3.5. Legal and policy framework 65
6.4. Capacity of child protection duty bearers 68
6.5. Structures and mandates 70
7. Efficiency 73
7.1. Defining efficiency 73
7.2. Cost-efficiency of resources and expenditure 73
7.3. Partnerships and coordination 75
8. Equity 79
8.1. Defining equity 79
8.2. Effect on the most vulnerable children and families 79
9. Sustainability 81
9.1. Defining sustainability 81
9.2. Enabling and constraining factors for replication and sustainability 81
9.3. Replicable operational models 83
10. Conclusions 85
11. Lessons Learned 89
12. Recommendations 91
References 93
Annex 1: Terms of Reference 95
Annex 2: Summary of Findings, Conclusions & Recommendations 105
Annex 3: Evaluation Matrix 111
Annex 4: Evaluation Team Composition 115
Annex 5: List of Key Documents Reviewed 117
Annex 6: Survey Results 123
Annex 7: Draft Roadmaps & Indicators 127
4
5
Acknowledgements
The evaluation team would like to thank Yosi Diani Tresna of BAPPENAS, Peter Leth, Chief of Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation and all the UNICEF Indonesia staff, particularly the Child Protection Section in Jakarta and the field offices, the Government of Indonesia staff at all levels and non-governmental stakeholders who took the time to meet in person to share their perspectives and support the evaluation of the systems building approach to child protection in Indonesia.
In addition, the evaluation team would like to thank the Evaluation Reference Group who provided comments on the Inception Report and the drafts of this evaluation report, and UNICEF regional advisors who provided technical advice and feedback throughout the process.
The evaluation team extends its appreciation to: Guy Thompstone of Child Frontiers, for providing technical support; Sadie Watson, Riccardo Polastro and Simon Henderson of IOD PARC, and Mel Turner and Kari Sann of IOD PARC Australasia for quality assurance and constructive critique.
Jo Kaybryn, Gisela Ervin-Ward, Kharisma Nugroho and Novina Suprobo
5
6
List of Tables and Figures
Figure 1: Summary of evaluation methods .............................................................................................. 22
Figure 2: Child Protection System in Indonesia Conceptual Framework .............................................. 29
Figure 3: Key government child protection stakeholders in Indonesia ................................................. 30
Figure 4: Indicative theory of change created retrospectively to show intended pathways to change of the current programme ............................................................................................................................ 33
Figure 5: UNICEF Programme Components according to relevance criteria assessed by the evaluation team........................................................................................................................................................... 36
Figure 6: Proposed roadmap - child protection system with suggested pre-conditions ....................... 40
Figure 7: UNICEF Country Programme Action Plan with progress against targets (self-reported by UNICEF) ................................................................................................................................................... 53
Figure 8: Proposed roadmap - Delivery of social welfare and child protection services ....................... 60
Figure 9: Proposed roadmap - Financial resources ................................................................................ 63
Figure 10: Proposed roadmap - Legal and regulatory framework .......................................................... 67
Figure 11: Proposed roadmap - Human capacity and resources ............................................................ 69
Figure 12: Proposed roadmap - Structures and mandates ..................................................................... 72
Figure 13: Summary of activities and components in the UNICEF CPAP ............................................. 74
Figure 14: Stakeholders surveyed about the relevance of the systems building approach ................... 123
Figure 15: Stakeholders surveyed about the strengthening of the child protection system ................. 123
Figure 16: Stakeholders surveyed about coordination and partnership ............................................... 124
Figure 17: Stakeholders surveyed about the focus on the most vulnerable ........................................... 124
Figure 18: Stakeholders surveyed about models suitable for replication .............................................. 125
6
7
Acronyms and Abbreviations
Bappeda Badan Perencanaan Daerah Provincial Planning Board
BAPPENAS Badan Perencanaan Pembangunan Nasional Ministry of National Development Planning
CPAP Country Programme Action Plan
EAPRO East Asia and Pacific Regional Office (UNICEF)
IR Intermediate result
KPAD Kelompok Perlindungan Anak Desa Village's Child Protection Committee
KPAI Komisi Perlindungan Anak Indonesia Indonesian Child Protection Commission
LPA Lembaga Perlindungan Anak Child Protection Agency
MOSA Ministry of Social Affairs
MOWECP Ministry of Women’s Empowerment and Child Protection
NGO Non-governmental organisation
OECD DAC Organisation of Economic Cooperation and Development, Development Assistance Committee
P2TP2A Pusat Pelayanan Terpadu Pemberdayaan Perempuan dan Anak Centre of Integrated Services for Women Empowerment and Child Protection
PCR Programme component result
PKSA Program Kesejahteraan Sosial Anak Social Welfare Program for Children
PKT Pusat Krisis Terpadu (Hospital-based) Integrated service centres
PPA PelayananPerempuandanAnakSpecialisedpoliceunitsforwomenandchildren
PPT Pusat Pelayanan Terpadu Integrated service centres
PRA Pesantren Ramah Anak Child Friendly Pesantren Initiative
RPJMN Rencana Program Jangka Menengah Nasional Medium-term national development plan of the Government
SBA Systems building approach
SOP Standard operating procedures
UCW Understanding Children’s Work
UN United Nations
UNEG United Nations Evaluation Group
UNICEF United Nations Children’s Fund
US United States
VACS Violence Against Children Survey
7
8
8
9
Executive Summary
The Government of Indonesia, supported by UNICEF, was one of the first in the South East Asia region to explicitly endorse a systems building approach to improve child protection outcomes. Indonesia’s child protection system is developing in a dynamic social and economic context, featuring decentralised structures and geographical and cultural diversity.
This formative evaluation is the first assessment of UNICEF’s systems building approach (SBA) in the region, designed to analyse whether and in what ways UNICEF’s child protection programme has been informed by systems thinking. The scope focussed on work over all four years of the country programme (2011-present), and included an analysis of the programme’s Theory of Change.
The findings and recommendations are intended to inform the development of national strategies for promoting child welfare and wellbeing. They will directly contribute to UNICEF’s forthcoming Country Programme Action Plan 2016-2020 and the implementation of the Government’s national planning document (RPJMN 2015-2019). The findings are intended to have wider implications for other United Nations agencies, Government departments and civil society organisations mandated to coordinate and implement child protection initiatives and programs.
The evaluation was implemented between July 2014 and January 2015, with in-country data collection taking place in August and September 2014. The main methods of data collection were through literature reviews, in-depth interviews (in person and by Skype) and facilitating group discussions in Jakarta, Central Java, South Sulawesi and Aceh provinces. Except for Jakarta, the team visited the central province district and at least one other district in each of the sub-regions, meeting with over 130 respondents. The majority of respondents were government stakeholders at national, and sub-national levels, and formal service providers. In addition, non-state respondents included NGOs collaborating with social and prison services, NGOs implementing community child protection pilots, and male and female Child Forum members in one of the districts. The evaluation team also met three male children in prison.
The key findings and conclusions are presented here against the key evaluation criteria areas.
Theory of Change
The evaluation found that the main planning and monitoring frameworks of the child protection work stream of UNICEF’s country programme lacked an overarching logic model or theory of change. UNICEF faces similar challenges as most organisations working to influence development outcomes: assessing what difference they make and the value they add. Development is rarely a simple linear process of cause and effect. Conventional logframes often fail to capture the complexity of change, whereas a theory of change attempts to address the gaps. Importantly, logframes and theories of change have more utility when they are used as planning rather than solely reporting tools. UNICEF’s Child Protection System work stream also needs to consider how it complements its parallel country programme components.
9
10
Relevance
As evident in the national planning documents (RPJMN) there is strong alignment between UNICEF’s and the Government’s commitments to building the child protection system in Indonesia. The strategic alignment is a result of the close working relationship between the two key partners UNICEF and BAPPENAS. UNICEF and the Government are in agreement that a child protection system is the most effective way to comprehensively and holistically protect children from harm and respond to vulnerable children.
The five key components of the National Child Protection System Conceptual Framework1 that informs the systems approach to child protection are evident in UNICEF’s initiatives. The child protection system agenda has been progressed markedly through the Government’s adoption of policies and regulations. The shift towards building the child protection system marks a conceptual move towards a holistic response, and away from a focus on single-issues only. This shift is still in progress because it requires a significant level of macro reform and will take time to effect.
It is evident that UNICEF has had specific roles in supporting (commissioning and providing technical advice to) child protection pilots aimed at strengthening the child protection system. At the same time there have been missed opportunities to collate and distribute the evidence and learning from these initiatives. This seems like an important gap. Taking on this collation, analysis and dissemination role represents a potentially unique role for UNICEF and a specific way in which it can express its added value.
There is little doubt that the concept of a child protection system has been well received and accepted by multiple levels of government. The shift towards the systems approach requires a large number and range of stakeholders who have different levels of need to access information about the emerging child protection system, its evolution and their role in it. This has been more challenging for UNICEF to address, or rather support the government to address. Ensuring that both government and non-government actors are accompanied through this shift, requires communicating the more nuanced and complex understandings of what a child protection system means. Without this there is a risk that the ‘systems building approach’ or ‘child protection system’ simply becomes the langue la mode of development partners. To date the key documentation available to government stakeholders are either too conceptual without enough signposts to explain the systems approach or highly detailed making them accessible to only the few rather than the majority. As part of this evaluation, a set of ‘roadmaps’ are proposed as tools to bridge the current simple and complex resources.
In relation to its relevance to UNICEF’s equity agenda, the systems building approach in Indonesia focuses on “all vulnerable children” but does not reflect an equity lens. Given UNICEF’s effective
1 In 2009, UNICEF guidance on systems development encouraged the creation of a protective environment for children by establishing three interlocking systems, cutting across multiple agencies, departments and community structures responsible for promoting the protection of children. These three ‘systems’ are: the social behaviour change system; the justice for children system; and the social welfare system. This represented the ‘system model’ that was to be strengthened using a systems building approach. UNICEF with its Government partners began adapting this model for the Indonesian context. The result is The National Child Protection System Conceptual Framework, referred to throughout the report as the Conceptual Framework
10
11
partnership with BAPPENAS, it has been in a strong position to influence the equity agenda within the systems building initiative. For UNICEF the equity lens may be implicit, but for partners it may need to be made explicit.
Effectiveness
The child protection results architecture of UNICEF’s programme does not provide a logical enough flow between its elements to measure progress. Nor can it confidently show probable causal links between activities, intermediate and long term results. This is likely due to the activities and indicators being based on a previous prioritisation process based on both national needs and limited UNICEF resourcing. But without the bigger picture being visible, the results framework in its current form creates challenges for UNICEF in demonstrating its effectiveness. At the same time, UNICEF has been implementing highly relevant activities that risk not being captured by the framework, such as the child protection pilot initiatives.
Significant changes have been achieved (e.g. particularly in relation to the legal and policy framework) but there seems that there is a tendency to continue the ‘style’ of promoting single issues. Although changing the law is a success, there is less evidence of how the programme has holistically considered and strategized to respond to Indonesia’s complex system of regulations and laws which may cause blockages to child protection, or coordination between multiple stakeholders.
Data and information management remains a significant gap, and UNICEF could have provided more clarity on how it aimed to address the distinctly different types of data that are needed for both policy decisions, and case management.
Nearly all of the child protection system elements from the Conceptual Framework have been focussed on through UNICEF and partner activities. A challenge is that they are spread out across different provinces and districts, which means that participants see only the pilot or initiative that they are engaged with. There is an opportunity to bring these elements together as examples of what a child protection system consists of, so that stakeholders can begin to see what a comprehensive set of responses looks like. This would likely help address the lack of clarity among government and other stakeholders.
UNICEF’s approach has put in place solid foundations which can be built on. The activities intended to address the elements of the system have done so to varying degrees and there are significant opportunities for this work to be built upon going forward. A comprehensive baseline has recently been established through the Governance Indicators Framework, which relates to engagement with government. This forms an important set of measurements and can contribute to a process of prioritisation and planning for both UNICEF and the government. It could also contribute to communicating to a wide range of government (sub-national) stakeholders the aims and steps of the child protection system building process.
Efficiency
UNICEF’s challenges in measuring efficiency, including cost-efficiency of its activities in relation to building a child protection system, reflect wider sectoral contextual challenges. UNICEF’s activities in Indonesia are relatively unique and therefore lack comparability data. The efficiency of the activities
11
12
themselves cannot be easily measured because outcomes cannot be simply quantified. Further the activities, intermediate and long term results are not simple, linear cause-and-effect relationships. One of the measures of UNICEF’s efficiency is its relationships with government. As a key mechanism for influencing changes, this seems logical; although further consideration to how UNICEF wants to measure the relationship seems needed. For efficiency to be more measurable, the programme will benefit from elaborating its rationale for implementing activities and aiming for their respective outcomes. Overall UNICEF’s could have considered in more depth, the indicators that would be most appropriate (and possible) with which to measure cost-efficiency and efficiencies in general.
Equity
UNICEF’s equity agenda is a central tenet to its work. But as mentioned above it is largely implicit in the child protection action plan rather than explicit. This means that the equity lens which the child protection system should be being designed through has not been present. There is a risk that equity will continue to be overlooked without processes explicitly assessing how activities and outcomes are built into the strategy with the equity lens. Sub-sets of equity include gender equality and the empowerment of women and girls. Evidence for addressing these elements did not emerge strongly in the evaluation. These issues, along with equity, should have been part of the earliest stages of designing the child protection system, and can be reintroduced going forward.
Sustainability
The sustainability questions in this evaluation focussed on the replicability of pilots and models. One of the challenges cited by Government respondents was that they were unaware themselves of models and pilots that were suitable for replication or scale up. A fundamental issue of financing replication and scale up was not mentioned by any respondents. Nevertheless there were some foundations for sustaining a focus on developing a child protection system such as the increasing importance of child protection in the RPJMN.
The wider issue of sustainability of the child protection system relates very strongly to government leadership. The Government’s commitment to policy and implementation is strongly reflected in the national planning document (RPJMN). Sustainability of the child protection system also hinges on national rather than international financing. This aspect has not been a focus of UNICEF’s programme to date, and would be an important part of strategies going forward.
Lessons learned
A number of good practices and lessons learned were identified during the evaluation. There are important opportunities to gather evidence from the successful initiatives as well as their lessons on which to build further successes, refine initiatives or translate them into other places and contexts. There are localised examples of where the systems approach to child protection is yielding results in terms of outcomes for children and their families. This was evident where a small number of services (health, social and justice) in a specific area were working together with effective and mutual referrals as appropriate. But the systems response quickly falters if a referral needs to go outside of the area that is functioning well, to a service that is not integrated effectively.
12
13
Principles underlying the UNICEF’s strategy need to have relevant activities associated with them to ensure that these are realised and do not remain implicit with the risk of becoming invisible. This applies to tackling the underlying causes of vulnerability, and designing the system through an equity and gender lens.
It will be important to capitalise on the appetite among respondents for engaging in the evolving child protection system. The importance of language and terminology was raised numerous times by respondents, and was observed by the evaluators. In general, there seemed to be a preference for ideas and explanations to be immediately followed up with an example. Ideas communicated in this way seemed to gain greater traction. In addition to working closely with BAPPENAS, direct relationships with other ministries and departments are important to continue pursuing.
Recommendations
Recommendations are based on the findings and conclusions of this evaluation. They are intended to inform the development of the planning of the next country programme for UNICEF’s child protection work stream. They are grouped into two key areas: UNICEF’s programme design, and UNICEF’s working relationship with the Government of Indonesia. They are not listed in priority order.
Revise the country programme design architecture to clearly articulate UNICEF’s vision and strategies to work with the government to build the child protection system
1) Develop the logic and theory of change for the next country programme action plan with greater clarity around how the components contribute to the overall goal/vision.
2) Develop internal strategies within UNICEF for the Child Protection cluster to work together with the other clusters to mutually support child protection systems building. For example, working with the Education cluster on common areas of concern would look at violence in schools and how schools develop their own child protection policies in line with the emerging system.
3) Make explicit UNICEF's aims to work towards a comprehensive child protection system and distinguish between the expected outcomes of the child protection system and the outcomes of UNICEF support to Government to develop the system.
4) Determine and define the kind of cost-efficiency and Value for Money analysis which is required by UNICEF (e.g. for accountability, measuring contribution etc.), and therefore the types of data that are needed to meet these needs.
5) Incorporate explicit reference to how equity and gender issues can be addressed through supporting the development of the child protection system (and include in the overall country strategy accountability mechanism for the equity and gender dimensions to be regularly reported upon).
6) Where appropriate develop specific sub-system level Theories of Change which inform and specify the overall child protection systems building Theory of Change.
13
14
7) Develop a clear strategy on how UNICEF will support social norms change on key issues affecting children’s well-being. With a lack of evidence in relation to current and recent interventions, this could focus on investing in robust models of social norms change for key pilots.
8) Clarify UNICEF's unique strengths and comparative advantages and thereby explicitly define UNICEF's role in the development of the child protection system. This could include continuing to investigate with the Government and NGOs experimental pilot initiatives and developing an evidence and replication strategy.
Ensure alignment with Government and support the realisation of Government commitments
9) Capitalise on the Government’s resounding commitment, UNICEF's leading role in providing child protection systems expertise, the strong partnership between the two actors and the progress in the legal architecture and implementation of pilots to define a shared vision for child protection in Indonesia. This could be done through the development of the Theory of Change or other design processes.
10) The RPJMN articulates an ambitious child protection agenda. UNICEF should carefully analyse the stated goals of the new RPJMN for child protection and ensure that appropriate strategic actions are articulated and requisite funding committed. This includes increased efforts to leverage government budgets along clear indicators for system reform.
11) Clarify and simplify terminology e.g. drop "SBA" and "systems building approach" and focus language more simply on building a child protection system.
12) Build capacity within both lead actors (UNICEF and the Government) for Results Based Management, using contemporary tools (e.g. theories of change) and the draft ‘roadmaps’ generated as part of this evaluation in an ongoing process of capacity development through the CPAP design and implementation.
13) Support the development of a comprehensive government led research agenda and key capacity development agenda for social welfare and justice.
14) Continue working closely with local authorities and civil society partners on ensuringbudget allocation, policy and legislative reform aligns with national strategies and laws for children’s protection.
14
15
1.Introduction
1.1. Background and rationale
This report presents the findings and recommendations of the Formative Evaluation of UNICEF Indonesia’s System Building Approach for protecting children from abuse and exploitation across the country.
In recent years UNICEF Indonesia2 and its partners have reframed their efforts to support the nascent child protection system. Like many other countries in the region, a more systemic approach has been adopted, one that views child protection in an increasingly holistic way.
As defined in UNICEF’s East Asia and Pacific Regional Conceptual Framework, a child protection system should be built upon five core elements, namely the three interlocking components of (i) the Social and Behavioural Change System, (ii) the Justice for Children System and (iii) the Social Welfare System for Children and Families.[1] Cross cutting elements (four and five) are data and information, and legal and policy frameworks.
Child protection is a national priority in the previous and current (2015-2019) 3 medium-term national development plan of the Government – the RPJMN (Rencana Program Jangka Menengah Nasional).[2, 3] UNICEF’s Child Protection Section, together with numerous government and non-state partners,4 has undertaken a number of activities aimed at establishing, and regulating the national child protection system in Indonesia’s regionally diverse and decentralized context. These efforts were initiated in the previous UNICEF Country Programme cycle, and have been the main focus of the child protection work stream of the current (2011-2015) strategy.
Indonesia’s child protection system is developing in a dynamic social and economic context, featuring decentralised structures and geographical and cultural diversity; with a frequent occurrence of natural disasters and emergencies. No formative evaluation of this emerging system or the systems building approach in Indonesia has been conducted by UNICEF or other partners. This evaluation comes at the end of UNICEF’s current programme strategy (2011-2015) and is intended to inform the development of the forthcoming programme period.
2 From this point forward, UNICEF Indonesia will simply be referred to as UNICEF. For the purpose of clarity, other chapters of UNICEF will be referred to by their full title.
3 Published on 08 January 2015
4 i.e. The Ministries of Planning, Social Affairs, Women’s Empowerment and Child Protection, Home Affairs, Law and Human Rights, the Police and multiple civil society partners (including NGOs, academic institutions and the private sector)
15
16
1.2.Purpose and objective of the evaluation
This formative evaluation is the first assessment of UNICEF’s Systems Building Approach (SBA) in Southeast Asia, designed to analyse whether and in what ways UNICEF’s child protection programme has been informed by systems thinking. It also provides an independent review of UNICEF’s efforts to strengthen the child protection system in Indonesia.
National, regional and global good practice in child protection informed the evaluation. Fieldwork in Indonesia was focused at the national and subnational levels, and within three of UNICEF’s six focus provinces of Central Java, Aceh and South Sulawesi.5 The evaluation took into account the specific contexts of these provinces, both in terms of the levels of implementation of child protection responses, and their specific geographic and population characteristics. Information was also considered from Nusa Tenggara Timur and Papua which both suffer from a dearth of data, but these provinces did not receive field visits as part of this evaluation.
The evaluation aimed to identify good practices and distil lessons learnt.
As such, the findings and recommendations are intended to inform the development of national strategies for promoting child welfare and wellbeing. They will directly contribute to UNICEF’s upcoming Country Programme 2016-2020 and the implementation of the Government’s RPJMN 2015-2019. The findings are intended to have wider implications for other United Nations agencies, Government departments and civil society organisations mandated to coordinate and implement child protection initiatives and programs.
The following objectives are those stated in the Terms of Reference:
Objectives
1. The evaluation will assess the relevance, effectiveness, efficiency and sustainability of the SBA strategy which is aimed at protecting Indonesia’s most vulnerable children. To the extent possible, an analysis at the impact level (changes in the situation of vulnerable children) is also expected.
2. In line with the above, the evaluation will determine the extent to which the above-mentioned strategy has been implemented with an equity and gender lens.
3. The evaluation will distil lessons learnt and draw concrete recommendations that will guide present and future interventions. Good practices in all five elements of the national child protection system are also expected to be documented through the evaluation process.
5 These three provinces were selected by UNICEF on the basis that they were the focus of the most engagement by the Child Protection Section on the Systems Building Approach and are provinces in which UNICEF is active.
16
17
1.3.Scope of the evaluation
The unit of analysis of the evaluation is the child protection programme of the UNICEF Country Programme Document (2011-present). The scope was UNICEF’s work over all four years of the country programme, and included an analysis of the programme’s Theory of Change. Geographically the evaluation scope was at both the national level in terms of UNICEF’s relationship with the government, and provincial level: it included UNICEF’s five focus provinces but focussed specifically in the selected provinces of Central Java, South Sulawesi and Aceh.
UNICEF operates under a partnership model and, of course, UNICEF’s work does not exist in a vacuum. Therefore the planning and programming documents of its partners, particularly the RPJMN, were also examined as they provide evidence of the influence of UNICEF’s support. However, these partner documents do not form the core of this evaluation.
There is no specific strategy for implementing the systems building approach to child protection in Indonesia. The approach is highlighted in the former Government’s national planning document RPJMN (2010-2014) as well as the overall UNICEF Country Programme Document 2011-2015.[4, 5] The evaluation framework draws from these two documents and allowed the evaluators to retrospectively develop a programme logic, as articulated in Section 4 which examines the child protection programme’s Theory of Change. To cross-check the veracity of the evaluation framework, a review was undertaken of the Systems Building Approach Conceptual Framework (Figure 2) as found in the regional Child Protection Toolkit [1] and applied to various studies, mappings and trainings.[6]
1.4.Changes from the Terms of Reference
There were several changes from the original Terms of Reference (Annex 1). The first is that the unit of evaluation was initially articulated as UNICEF’s “systems building approach strategy” but this proved too nebulous to define as a written strategy as such is not available. Rather, the approach is manifest in the child protection component of UNICEF’s country programme. Therefore, the unit of focus was clarified during the course of the evaluation to the child protection programme of the UNICEF Country Programme Document (2011-present).
Secondly, a notable change was that the Terms of Reference stated that the evaluation process should include participatory approaches to data collection with children. It noted the following under the Methodology section:
“The evaluation will be participatory in nature; involving consultations and feedback to concerned stakeholders, including children.”
The participatory element of the evaluation was consultative and included feedback to stakeholders but engagement with children was removed for time and budget reasons. The evaluation activities focused on consultations with policy makers and service providers from a range of UNICEF partners including Government (national, provincial, district), non-governmental organisations (NGOs), academic institutions, and community leaders and structures. Consultations were also held with staff from UNICEF’s national and field offices.
17
18
A third deviation from the original Terms of Reference was in relation to a specific consultative and analytical approach. Given Indonesia’s complex socio-political operating environment, the terms of reference proposed an adapted Delphi method to seek opinions and consensus from selected experts on the evaluation findings and recommendations to inform decision making. In the evaluation inception report, the team proposed an alternative method of using an adapted Bayesian Belief Networks methodology, in which participants can analyse causal links and relationships between them. It is useful for analysing a system or set of causes and effects, where there is considerable uncertainty. In practice, the Bayesian networks methodology was not possible because the opportunity to work with a small number of key stakeholders was not forthcoming in lieu of the much larger gathering for the evaluation findings validation workshop. Instead the evaluation team used the thinking behind Bayesian networks to consider the probabilistic relationships and conditional dependencies between and within elements of the child protection system. This formed part of the team’s process for developing the ‘roadmaps’ and potential M&E indicators in the Annex 7.
Selected experts were engaged in the evaluation but not through a specific activity using either the Delphi or Bayesian networks methods. A limitation of this is the missed opportunity to gain wider buy-in and inputs into the findings during the evaluation itself. A process of holding a similarly review activity on the evaluation findings and recommendations with experts in Indonesia is likely to still be a useful process for UNICEF and government stakeholders in using this evaluation to stimulate dialogue and initiate some of the recommendations.
Fourthly, the second part of the evaluation’s objective 1 (To the extent possible, an analysis at the impact level i.e. changes in the situation of vulnerable children), was not possible in any meaningful way. While the information collected in the provincial mapping exercises in 2009 could have formed the basis of a baseline, the data was not revisited regularly or updated since.
Fifthly and finally, the inclusion of the provinces of Nusa Tenggara Timur and Papua in the evaluation was requested by the Government due to their unique contexts; however, without UNICEF dedicated child protection staff and little data on the systems building approach in these provinces, no site visits from the evaluation team were included. Due to its perceived importance, the evaluation team took Nusa Tenggara Timur’s child protection situation into account through the literature review and a site visit report from UNICEF. For Papua province the information came only from a literature review.
1.5.Criteria used for the evaluation
The objectives of the formative evaluation were clearly defined in the Terms of Reference. They included four of the OECD DAC criteria6 (i.e. relevance, effectiveness, efficiency and sustainability),
6 The OECD DAC criteria for evaluating development assistance is part of a wider set of guidelines produced by the Development AssistanceCommittee and its members. The evaluation criteria were first published in 1991 and consist of five key areas of enquiry (relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, impact and sustainability). They form the most widely used framework for evaluations in international development contexts but are not necessarily a requirement for all evaluations. They can be adapted or added to depending on the context, or alternatively other frameworks can be used in their place. More information about the OECD DAC Criteria for Evaluating Development Assistance can be found here http://www.oecd.org/development/evaluation/daccriteriaforevaluatingdevelopmentassistance.htm
18
19
plus an additional focus area, equity, and were in line with the United Nations Evaluation Group (UNEG) norms.7
The fifth OECD DAC criteria, impact (i.e. on children) was assessed where possible, but was not intended to form a substantial element of primary data collection because of the unlikelihood of quantifiable results being available at this relatively early stage in the development of the national child protection system. At the same time, the evaluation purpose was formative rather than summative, and the timescale and resources allocated were insufficient for including a comprehensive impact assessment.
However, the evaluation team did aim to identify the extent to which evidence of impact on children is being recorded as part of UNICEF’s child protection work in Indonesia.
1.6.Key evaluation questions
The following questions were central to the original evaluation design, with sub-questions and new areas of enquiry further elaborated by the Evaluation Team during the inception phase. The questions were adjusted as the Evaluation Matrix was developed during the inception phase (Annex 3). The matrix was used as the framework of analysis to ensure consistency of data collection across the multiple team members. The original questions are included in the Terms of Reference and the revised questions in the Evaluation Matrix; both are included in the Annexes.
Key questions:
How relevant is UNICEF’s strategy to build a child protection in Indonesia’s dynamic operating environment of economic growth and status as an emerging Middle Income Country and with reference to the country’s size, frequent natural disasters, decentralisation and cultural diversity and other aspects?
How effectively has UNICEF’s efforts strengthened the national child protection system and the five key elements, from the perspectives of key stakeholders including national and sub-national government, civil society and communities?
How efficiently has UNICEF used the available resources to deliver high quality outputs in a timely manner and to achieve targeted objectives through the current UNICEF 2011-present Country Programme?
To what extent have efforts to build the child protection system had a gender and equityperspective?
7 The UN evaluation norms seek to facilitate system-wide collaboration on evaluation by ensuring that evaluation entities within the UN follow agree-upon basic principles. They provide a reference for strengthening, professionalizing and improving the quality of evaluation in all entities of the United Nations system, including funds, programmes and specialized agencies. The norms are consistent with other main sources including the OECD DAC guidelines above. More information about the UNEG can be found here http://www.uneval.org/
19
20
What are the enabling as well as constraining factors that influence replication and sustainability? (at national level and at sub-national level?)
All findings, conclusion and recommendations in this evaluation report are related directly to the evaluation questions found in Annex 3.
20
21
2.Methodology
2.1.Responsibilities
The Evaluation Team reported directly to UNICEF Indonesia’s Evaluation Manager. The Evaluation Reference Group included representatives from UNICEF, BAPPENAS,8 and UNICEF East Asia and Pacific Regional Office. They guided the development of the Terms of Reference, selection of the evaluation team, organisation of the inception and draft report workshops, invited stakeholders to participate and guided the approach to field work.
IOD PARC, an international evaluation company, led a team of national and international experts from Migunani & Mberkahi and Child Frontiers. Team members from Migunani & Mberkahi, an Indonesian non-profit research and evaluation company, were responsible for data collection, analysis and report writing. Child Frontiers, an international consulting company that promotes the care, wellbeing and protection of children, provided technical support on child protection systems and brought experience of the regional context. Details of the roles and responsibilities of the Evaluation Team are provided in Annex 4.
The UNICEF country office provided literature and documentation, logistical support for field visits and comments and feedback on deliverables.
2.2. Description of data collection methods and data sources
The evaluation was implemented between July 2014 and January 2015, with in-country data collection taking place in August/September and a national stakeholders’ validations workshop in November 2014. The Team developed a list of key respondents to include in the evaluation across national, sub-national and local levels in collaboration with the Evaluation Reference Group. UNICEF colleagues in all locations of data collection proposed comprehensive schedules based on their key partners in the systems building approach to child protection and their relationships with wider stakeholders.
The main methods of data collection were through literature reviews, in-depth interviews (in person and by Skype) and facilitating group discussions in Jakarta, Central Java, South Sulawesi and Aceh provinces. Except for Jakarta, the team visited the central province district and at least one other district in each of the sub-regions, meeting with over 130 respondents.
The majority of respondents were government stakeholders at national, and sub-national levels (including provincial, district and sub-district), and formal service providers (e.g. prison service, panti [residential care home] and social service implementers). In addition, non-state respondents
8 BAPPENAS is ‘Badan Perencanaan Pembangunan Nasional’, Ministry of National Development Planning
21
22
included NGOs collaborating with social and prison services, NGOs implementing community child protection pilots, a privately funded panti and male and female Child Forum members9 in one of the districts. The evaluation team also met three male children in prison.
Figure 1 indicates the key methods used and their application in different phases in the evaluation. The majority of the literature review took place in the inception phase prior to the field work. Literature continued to be added to the review process throughout the course of the evaluation. The list of more than 80 documents that were reviewed is available in Annex 5.
Methods Prior to fieldwork Fieldwork Post fieldwork
Literature review
Interviews (Skype and phone)
Interviews & Focus Group Discussions
Survey
Jakarta
Central Java
South Sulawesi
Aceh
- indicates intensity of use of methods
Figure 1: Summary of evaluation methods
A short survey was distributed to respondents with whom the team members met in person, and was emailed to those respondents who engaged through telephone or Skype interviews. A total of 136 completed surveys were returned, with all but 2 respondents providing information about the type of organisation that they work for (e.g. government or non-governmental) and the national or sub-national levels at which they work. The majority of respondents were Government employees, with the biggest proportion working at provincial level. The survey was introduced by BAPPENAS at inception workshops in each of the provinces and districts visited in Central Java, and distributed by the evaluation team in all three provinces directly to participants.
Three types of triangulation methods were applied: cross reference of different data sources (namely interviews and documentation); investigator triangulation – the deployment of multiple evaluators; and review by inquiry participants through the respondents’ validation meeting in Jakarta in November 2014 and through consultation with UNICEF and government key respondents during the report drafting process. The triangulation efforts tested for consistency of results, noting that inconsistencies do not necessarily weaken the credibility of results, but reflect the sensitivity of different types of data collection methods.[7] These processes were used to ensure validity, establish common threads and trends, and identify divergent views.
9 Child Forums are a government-mandated institution at provincial and district levels of elected child representatives, varying in age and backgrounds
22
23
2.3. Limitations and constraints
Key factors to ensure consistent data collection
Logistical organisation was a key factor in the data collection process due to the large number of respondents met in a short time. The UNICEF team members were essential partners in this respect in terms of organising schedules for each of the locations, coordinating with Government and arranging appointments. At the same time, the team was conscious that opportunities could emerge at short notice to meet with additional stakeholders which were not initially planned for. The teams therefore aimed to be as flexible as possible by dividing into smaller groups to include simultaneous interviews and meetings. In addition to the shared experiences, interview frameworks were also important to facilitate a common approach to the data collection. The interview frameworks also allowed for flexibility in targeting relevant questions at specific respondents, and for inviting responses to open-ended responses.
Assessment on the quality of available data
The quality of available documentation is of a generally high standard, particularly in relation to UNICEF’s own literature from Indonesia as well as regional and global reports. There is a large volume of documentation, but there are still some gaps including:
Quantitative data on child protection issues in Indonesia. The available data is limited in quantity, quality and analysis and is inconsistent across the country. For example, the government’s planned violence against children survey (measuring prevalence and incidence on physical, sexual and emotional violence) against children has not been published due to the poor quality of the data. Annual government-funded surveys regularly collect information about child protection concerns such as birth registration, child marriage, child labour, among other issues but these are not regularly analysed and linked to government planning processes.
Information about community and family perceptions and understanding of child protection and violence against children.10 For example, there has been little mapping of the child protection ‘system’ at local community level (i.e. informal and non-state led). The evaluation team recognises that this is an opportunity for future action and there is a more detailed discussion later in the report.
An in-depth, explicitly stated logical framework, theory of change or strategy for implementing a systems building approach to guide child protection programming. Again, this is dealt with in detail in the body of this report, but this
10 There are examples of studies that have been conducted such as the Knowledge, Attitudes and Behaviours On Violence Against Children: South Sulawesi Research Study 2013, Center for Child Protection, University of Indonesia. However, there is a lack of regular or ongoing efforts to investigate and understand individual and family perceptions of violence across Indonesia’s diverse contexts.
23
24
limitation was somewhat addressed by retrospectively creating an indicative definition and programme logic upon which to base the evaluation.
Filling all three of these gaps is a significant opportunity for the programme going forward. A series of ‘roadmaps’ are suggested to inform dialogue between UNICEF and partners in the context of planning and prioritisation during the next country programme period. They are included in the body of the report for illustrative purposes, and in Annex 7.
In relation to the primary qualitative data that the team collected through interviews in Jakarta and three provinces, respondents were found to be candid about their role in child protection, what they perceived as effective approaches to developing and implementing a child protection system, and what they saw as the challenges and barriers. The team took account of the potential biases of interviewees, which were noted. There were instances where interviewees, particularly more senior members of Government departments, displayed a range of diplomacy skills when they seemed to want to avoid explicit criticism of others, but still communicated their individual points of view. Interviews and focus group discussions were conducted in English and Bahasa Indonesian with interpretation provided as required.
As this was a UNICEF commissioned evaluation, in partnership with the Government of Indonesia, it was requested by the Reference Group during the inception workshop that a senior Government representative accompany selected site visits in order to facilitate contact with local authorities, and contribute to and learn from the evaluation process. A challenge for an interviewer being accompanied by a Government colleague in the context of a hierarchical (albeit decentralised) system is that the risk of social desirability (the tendency of interviewees to provide responses based on their perceived acceptability rather than their own view) can be increased. This is noted as a risk to the data collection quality in Central Java province and was mitigated by splitting the team into two during key interviews.
Ensuring that evaluation team members had a common understanding and perspective on the evaluation topic
The team worked collectively to ensure a cohesive understanding of the evaluation topic and the approaches and methodologies. The Evaluation Matrix served as the source reference for data collection and analysis. All team members had access to the extensive background and related information, shared their written notes from meetings and interviews, and participated in frequent team debriefings and meetings. In this way all team members were able to actively participate in the evolving analysis.
Ethical considerations
As anticipated, the data collection in-country was qualitative in nature and managed through existing relationships with UNICEF and wider stakeholders including Government departments, service providers and NGOs. Formal ethical clearance was not required but the data collection process maintained the highest standards of data protection. The evaluation team followed UNICEF Evaluation Guidelines by adhering to the United Nations Evaluation Group norms and standards.[8]
24
25
All internal documents provided to the review team by UNICEF and other stakeholders continue to be held in confidence and not distributed beyond the team members.
Participants in the data collection were informed of the purposes of their participation and how the team would use the data that they provided. They had opportunities to provide follow up information or clarifications.
Respondents were asked for their consent for the evaluation team to quote them, to use attributable data and to attribute comments and feedback to them in the final report. In some cases, interviews were recorded for note taking purposes with the permission of the interviewee. In cases where permission to attribute comments was not granted, data will be presented in a generalised or non-identifiable manner.
2.4. Child Protection protocols
Limited participation of children was expected through facilitated discussions with members of local Child Forum11 members. These were conducted with the safety and protection of children at their centre in the presence of adults responsible for their welfare. The discussions with children were limited to enquiry regarding their experience of promoting child rights (in the case of Child Forum members) and the services and organisations that they interacted with (in the case of children and parents). In addition, two of the evaluation team members met three male children in an adult prison, with the children’s advocate and social worker present.
11 Child Forums are a government-mandated institution at provincial and district levels of elected child representatives, varying in age and backgrounds
25
26
26
27
3.Contextual Framing
3.1.The Indonesian context
The Republic of Indonesia’s geography, political structure and myriad cultures all have a profound influence on children and the systems developed to protect them.
Indonesia is the world’s fourth most populous country with an estimated 248.8 million people in 2013 [9] of which 28.9% were aged 14 or younger, a decline from 30% in 2004[10] and 34% are aged under 18 years.[11] Approximately 28% of these children live in the poorest quintile household and 23% in the poorer quintile.[11]
The geographical diversity and scale of the archipelago presents challenges in providing services to support children. The archipelago consists of over 17,500 islands with a combined area of 1,910,931 km2. The islands range from remote, intermittently connected islands with limited resources, through to Java which is home to one of the world’s true ‘mega-cities’. More than half of the population live in the area of Java: 18% in Jawa Barat (West Java), 15% in Jawa Timur (East Java) and 13% in Jawa Tengah (Central Java), plus the populations of Jakarta, Yogyakarta and Banten. According to the 2010 national census, the population of Central Java province alone is 32,382,657.[11] This is larger than the population of Australia, so it is not difficult to imagine the challenges that are faced in supporting vulnerable children at such a scale. A population of this size, many of whom live in a situation with long standing poverty issues, poses a huge challenge for a national government that is trying to provide services to improve child well-being.
In addition to the sheer size of the population, Indonesia has significant cultural diversity. For example, diverse cultural practices and beliefs mean there are varying perceptions about what childhood is, how children should be treated and what child protection is. These all impact significantly on children’s wellbeing.
All of these examples of Indonesia’s scale and complexity illustrate the challenges inherent in providing services in this context. The Indonesian Government is undertaking a process of decentralisation and the complex, changing bureaucracy is still in the process of working out the practicalities of how this system will work to provide governance and services for Indonesians. This is a particularly important issue because layers of bureaucracy mean that services to children and families at risk are often slow to respond and limited in their outreach.
Indonesia has made significant progress but numerous child protection challenges remain. Indonesia is among the 10 countries with the highest number of children under the age of five who do not have their births registered. On child trafficking, Indonesia is considered by the US Department of State as a Tier 2 country: it is still considered a major source, and to a much lesser extent a destination country for women, children, and men who are subjected to sex trafficking and forced labour.[12] According to the report, the most significant source areas being the provinces of West Java, Central Java, East Java, West Nusa Tenggara, East Nusa Tenggara, and Banten.
27
28
In regards to child labour, the Understanding Children’s Work (UCW) Programme indicated that around 7% or (2.3 million) Indonesian children aged 7-14 years still work in employment in the country.[13] Most of these children were employed in the agriculture sector and in illegal work (according to Indonesian legislation) with almost half of them exposed to hazardous conditions such as dust or steam, cold or extreme heat, fire and gas, chemicals, dangerous heights and dangerous machinery and equipment.
According to the National Commission for Child Protection, a high number of cases of violence against children were recorded in the country between 2010 and 2014.12[14] Cases were registered in all 34 provinces, and in 179 districts/cities. More than 50% of the violence recorded by the National Commission was related to sexual violence, the remaining to physical abuse, abandonment, abduction, economic exploitation, trafficking of children for commercial sexual exploitation as well as cases of seizure of the child.
Beside many positive traditions, certain attitudes and practices are harmful to children and violate their rights. Many communities, for example, see corporal punishment and violence against children as the norm, and part of usual methods of behavioural discipline.[15]
In relation to child marriage, a recent report from UNICEF identified that in Indonesia, the risk of marrying before age 18 is less than half of what it was three decades ago.[16] Despite this improvement, child marriage, especially for girls, is still a reality in the country for a quarter of the country’s girls. Recent analysis of government data from 2012 /2013 highlights that up to 25% of ever-married women aged 20-24 years were married before 18 years.[17]
Details about the circumstances and prevalence of these child protection issues can be found in existing documents and reports.[6, 18]
3.2. Systems building approach in Indonesia
The Government of Indonesia, supported by UNICEF, was one of the first in the South East Asia region to explicitly endorse a systems building approach to improve child protection outcomes.
Countries in many parts of the world have applied a systems lens to the development of their child and family welfare sectors, in similar ways to the advancement of health, education and justice sectors. The catalyst for debate within many countries of South East Asia and the Pacific was the launching of UNICEF’s East Asia Pacific Regional Office’s (EAPRO) first edition of the Child Protection Programme Strategy Toolkit 2009.[1] This Toolkit was developed in response to a general shift in thinking about how to approach child protection in international development and reflected a strategic change within UNICEF at the global level. The toolkit encourages the development of a “systematic, comprehensive and national strategy to child protection that includes prevention as well as crisis interventions.”[1] The rationale was: “Rather than focus on particular manifestations of abuse, exploitation and violence or on categories of children affected, the strategy takes a step back to
12 A figure of 22 million is quoted in documentation but there are questions on the validity of how these figures are determined
28
29
embrace child protection systems that exist within each country for protecting children. The strategy recognizes that strengthening or creating those systems will produce more fundamental and tangible impact in terms of solidifying a protective environment for all children.”
In 2009, UNICEF guidance on systems development encouraged the creation of a protective environment for children by establishing three interlocking systems, cutting across multiple agencies, departments and community structures responsible for promoting the protection of children. These three ‘systems’ are: the social behaviour change system; the justice for children system; and the social welfare system. This represented the ‘system model’ that was to be strengthened using a systems building approach.
UNICEF with its Government partners began adapting this model for the Indonesian context. The result is The National Child Protection System Conceptual Framework (Figure 2), referred to throughout the report as the Conceptual Framework.
Figure 2: Child Protection System in Indonesia Conceptual Framework
It is important to note that despite a lack of definitions, precision of terminology and conceptual clarity around the approach, UNICEF has trail-blazed the path in Indonesia. As other countries have experienced, systems building is an incremental process, one that requires constant adaptation over years, possibly generations. As discussed later in this report, this is highly likely to be the case in the Indonesian context. The systems based approach to child protection has only been applied for four years so far and the refinement of definitions and concepts is an on-going exercise. This evaluation has been conducted in the spirit of learning to provide support to this continuing contextualisation. Examples of this evolution can be found in such documents as the RPJMN 2015-2019.[3]
29
30
Figure 3, below, shows the main government stakeholders in the child protection system in Indonesia. It does not attempt to disaggregate sub-systems, define relationships or give detail about responsibilities. Neither does it attempt to define the role of children in the child protection system, not least because this is underdeveloped in the Indonesian context. ‘Non-state actors’ acknowledges the wide range of stakeholders including NGOs, training and research institutions, private sector, media, general public and development partners including UNICEF.
Figure 3: Key government child protection stakeholders in Indonesia
•Min istr y of Pla n n in g (BA PPENA S)
•Min istr y of Wom en 's Em pow er m en t a n d Ch ild Pr otect ion
•Min istr y of Socia l A ffa ir s
•Oth er Min istr ies: Min istr y of Ju st ice, Min istr y of Edu ca t ion , Min istr y of Hea lth
•Police
•KPA I (Na tion a l Com m ission on Ch ild Pr otect ion
•Pr ov in cia l Depa r tm en t of Pla n n in g (BA PPEDA )
•Depa r tm en t of Wom en 's Em pow er m en t a n d Ch ild Pr otect ion
•Depa r tm en t of Socia l A ffa ir s
•Oth er Depa r tm en ts: Depa tm en t of Ju st ice, Depa r tm en t of Edu ca t ion , Depa r ten t of Hea lth
•Police
•Com m ission on Ch ild Pr otect ion
•Distr ict office of Pla n n in g
•Depa r tm en t of Wom en 's Em pow er m en t a n d Ch ild Pr otect ion
•Depa r tm en t of Socia l A ffa ir s
•Oth er Depa r tm en ts: Depa tm en t of Ju st ice, Depa r tm en t of Edu ca t ion , Depa r ten t of Hea lth
•Sch ools, Hospita ls, Pa n ti, Police, Deten tion Cen tr es [DISTRICT a n d LOCA L]
•Gov er n m en t ser v ice pr ov ider s su ch a s pa n ti a n d P2 TP2 A
•Sch ools
•Ch ildr en 's Gr ou ps
•Fa m ilies
•Sch ools, Hospita ls, Pa n ti, Police, Deten tion Cen tr es [DISTRICT a n d LOCA L]
Local Direct Service Provision
Non
-state actors: UN
ICE
F, civil society, N
GO
s, academ
iaA
dvocacy, tech
nical su
pp
ort, service provision
Children and families
National National Planning, Legislation, Regulation, Budgeting
Provincial Provincial Planning, Legislation Regulation, Budgeting
District District Planning, Legislation, Regulation, Budgeting, Direct Service Provision
30
31
Findings
4.Theory of Change
Finding #1
The Country Programme Action Plan lacks an overarching logic model or theory of change.
The current iteration of implementing a systems building approach to child protection is expressed in UNICEF’s Country Programme Action Plan (CPAP) (2011-2015), which includes three Programme Components Results (PCRs) to be met by the end of 2015, and achieved through a number of time-bound Intermediate Results (IRs).[19]
The Country Programme Action Plan lacks an overarching logic model or theory of change although the plan is organised in a results oriented framework in line with UNICEF’s approach to results based management.13 The absence of a logic model or theory of change presents constraints to evaluability, as do logic gaps between the higher level results framework and the interventions which comprise the action plan. The component (long term) results, intermediate results and activities in the programme framework have been placed retrospectively in an indicative logic model below (Figure 4) by the evaluation team in an attempt to extract the implied logic of the evaluation object.
When developing a theory of change or logic model, a useful method of checking the ‘story’ of the outcomes and activities, is to extract the associated indicators and see if they tell a logical coherent ‘story’ themselves when rearranged and combined. When doing this exercise with the current indicators in the CPAP for child protection outcomes, there are some indicators which fit well together while others seem like outliers.
Overall the child protection results, outcomes and indicators in the CPAP come across as disjointed to an external reader for two main reasons:
the approach to building a child protection system is implicit rather than explicit
the priorities which have been included appear to come from a wider strategy, but this wider strategy is not contained in any one place for easy identification
13 Although ‘Theory of Change’ terminology is relative new to UNICEF, Management for Development Results (MfDR) and Results Based Management approaches have been in use since at least 2005
31
32
There is a tension between articulating a simplified logic that is possible to follow in one diagram or table, and the object of the work (i.e. the development of a national child protection system) being complex and nuanced. It is necessary to illustrate the deeper and more numerous steps of developing the system, which can subsequently be summarised or elements focused in on. As part of this evaluation process a series of ‘roadmaps’ have been generated to support this process. They are including in the main body of the report and in Annex 7.
A challenge for UNICEF is to support its partners to develop the overall complex system, and at the same time identify and fulfil its niche or comparative advantage in supporting the process.
A systems approach to child protection has become UNICEF Indonesia’s main approach for its child protection work stream. At the same time, UNICEF’s wider country programme has different streams that have mutual implications for the protection of children. With the exception of the stream focussed on emergency and disaster response, there are no references to UNICEF’s other components. The evaluation team recommends that the UNICEF team articulates two directions for its work: upstream and externally with national and subnational partners supporting the development of the child protection system in the strategic areas that it identifies are its strengths; and internally within UNICEF supporting the mainstreaming of the systems approach and identifying how the issues-based programmes are considered within a systems perspective, mutually reinforce each other and work towards child wellbeing outcomes.
To achieve the above, and in recognition of the evolution of the work and the achievements to date, there is a need for UNICEF’s child protection system strategy to move from its current state of being implicit to being explicit.
The original Conceptual Framework of ‘systems building approach’ and the original child protection systems mapping toolkit provided the springboards which launched the concerted effort to introduce a child protection system. Since then, UNICEF and its partners have generated significant research and learning from initiatives that have been piloted. Stakeholders need to look forward to create an ambitious vision for child protection in Indonesia, and draw on the evidence has been generated to date, to identify key lessons, and gaps in data too.
32
33
Fig
ure
4:
Ind
ica
tiv
e th
eory
of
cha
ng
e cr
eate
d r
etro
spec
tiv
ely
to
sh
ow
in
ten
ded
pa
thw
ay
s to
ch
an
ge
of
the
curr
ent
pro
gra
mm
e
33
34
35
5.Relevance
5.1.Defining relevance
Relevance in the context of evaluation is internationally defined as ‘The extent to which the aid activity is suited to the priorities and policies of the target group, recipient and donor.’[20] The principle of relevance is often equated exclusively with the ‘alignment with government priorities’ but it should also encompass the relevance to needs of citizens and, specifically in this context, the rights children. Relevance is a critical issue for UNICEF in Indonesia for three reasons:
Firstly, there is an ongoing consideration of what UNICEF’s ‘core role’ is in middle income countries in general.
Secondly, relevance in Indonesia includes the country’s vast size in terms of both population and geography and its considerable diversity, which poses challenges in terms of the effective contribution that UNICEF can make at national or sub-national levels, but also its sensitivity and adaptation to Indonesia’s internal diversity. This also includes the contexts of Indonesia’s system of governance, decentralisation and budgeting protocols.
Thirdly, there is the consideration of whether the activities and outcomes in UNICEF’s country programme action plan are relevant to the systems building approach to child protection.
5.2. Alignment with UNICEF child protection results and national
priorities
UNICEF Child Protection Programme 2011 to present (assessment by the evaluation team)
Programme Component Results
Evidence of Alignment to Beneficiary Needs identified by the evaluation team
Relevance assessed by the evaluation team
PCR 4.1 By 2015, all vulnerable children are progressively protected by comprehensive and community-basedchild protection system (e.g. social welfare, police, and justice) especially in 5 focus provinces.
Almost 30% of Indonesia’s 240+ million population is aged 14 or younger and 34% are aged under 18 years
Indonesia is among the 10 countries with the highest number of children under the age of five who do not have their births registered
Indonesia is still considered a major source country for child trafficking
7% or (2.3 million) Indonesian children aged 7-14 years still work in employment
Almost 22 million cases of violence against children were recorded in the country
Against the backdrop of Indonesia’s status as an emerging Middle Income Country, there is still a large population of citizens under the age of 18, high levels of violence, abuse and exploitation (as far as data is available), and limited availability of social services.
Therefore, the CPAP focus on
35
36
between 2010 and 2014 Although the risk of marrying before age 18 is
less than half of what it was three decades ago, child marriage, especially for girls, is still a reality in the country for a quarter of the country’s girls
Social welfare and social protection mechanisms have been introduced for specific categories of vulnerable families and individuals
A national child protection legislation and several child protection relevant laws have been introduced
protecting all vulnerablechildren through a comprehensive and community-based child protection system seems highly relevant to Indonesian citizens’ needs.
PCR 4.2 By 2015, decision makers at national and sub national levels have access to and utilize a comprehensivemonitoring and data collection systems on child protection for policy, planning and budgeting purposes.
Indonesia’s context suffers from paucity of comprehensive data and coordinated systems making it difficult to plan and budget.
An emphasis on data collection systems and analysis of data seems important given the challenges of Indonesia’s context therefore the CPAP’s prioritisation seems highly relevant.
PCR 4.3 By 2015 the child protection emergencypreparedness and response mechanism is fully functioning at national level and in 3 provinces.
Indonesia is highly vulnerable to natural disasters such as volcanic eruptions, floods and the effects of tsunamis. Parts of the country are still recovering from conflict.
Given the heightened vulnerability to children in emergency situations, and the frequency with which Indonesia experiences natural disasters, it seems highly relevant that the CPAP includes a focus on emergency preparedness and response.
Figure 5: UNICEF Programme Components according to relevance criteria assessed by the evaluation team
The inclusion of the word “progressively” in the first Component Result risks creating ambiguity (Figure 5). It indicates that the plan aims for an improvement by the end of the plan’s timeframe but could be cause for confusion because the outcome statement does not specify the incremental changes that it expects the activities to achieve. The intermediate results and the indicators are drawn from the Country Programme Document.[4] What seems missing in UNICEF’s and the government’s strategy is an overall timetable for measuring the evolution of the child protection system, perhaps disaggregated into phases. In this way, UNICEF’s forthcoming five year plan, can link its component results to the achievement of a phase or phases to specify the incremental changes it intends to achieve.
36
37
UNICEF selected its five (six in relation to some activities) target provinces based on identified need i.e. where the poorest and most vulnerable are (more remote and less populated provinces) and where the largest numbers of vulnerable children are (e.g. highly populated provinces such as Central Java). Given UNICEF’s context of limited resources compared to the scale of Indonesia, the reality may be that five provinces are too many. By spreading itself too thinly there is a risk that UNICEF will limit or undermine its relevance (and effectiveness) in the selected provinces. This observation is reflected in the recent evaluation of UNICEF Indonesia’s engagement in the decentralisation process.[21] The diversity between and within the five target provinces creates an opportunity to test whether child protection systems initiatives vary in each context (in both implementation and outcomes) or whether there are challenges with having uniform indicators which apply across all five.
Programme Component Result (PCR) 2 has a notable emphasis in relation to data management systems but the subsequent intermediate results focus on the national violence against children survey and training/capacity building for data utilisation. The development of a system as such does not seem to be present in the intermediate results making it difficult to see how the achievement of the IRs (Intermediate Results) will lead to achieving the PCR.
PCR 3 is relevant given Indonesia’s vulnerability to emergency situations but child protection systems are relevant across all the components of the country plan and therefore there is a considerable gap in the results framework as child protection results do not make reference to the other components and vice versa.
At aggregate CPAP level, the analytical basis for the systems based approach to child protection is limited in two ways: a situational analysis was not conducted in relation to whether the systems based approach Conceptual Framework was the most relevant or appropriate concept to implement in Indonesia; and the mapping of the child welfare system that was conducted in 2009 was a work in progress at the time, and contained its own limitations.[18, 22] However, it could have provided a baseline to build upon and measure against, but progress against the original data was not tracked and the mapping was not updated.
RPJMN 2010-2014 and RPJMN 2015-2019
Finding #2
The systems building approach to child protection aligns closely with the Government’s priorities as indicated in the national planning documents RPJMN 2010-2014 and RPJMN 2015-2019.
The RPJMN (2010-2014) makes a number of references to the protection of vulnerable children, child poverty and the need for children’s basic needs and welfare to be promoted.[5] The RPJMN 2015-2019 was in draft form at the time of this evaluation process, during which BAPPENAS staff and UNICEF were working closely together to strengthen the child protection provisions.[2] The plan has since been finalised and published (08 January 2015), and although a comprehensive review of the new plan was outside the scope of the evaluation, it can be confirmed that RPJMN (2015-2019) re-emphasises the government’s commitment to child protection.[3]
37
38
The new plan and includes the strengthening of the child protection system including prevention, recovery and rehabilitation of children victims of violence, exploitation, neglect and abuse. Child protection remains a national priority in ‘Book 1’ of the plan and in ‘Book 2’ which outlines the cross-sector priorities.14
BAPPENAS is in the unique position of coordinating planning over the wide range of ministries and agencies in Indonesia. The fact that BAPPENAS has taken a leadership role in ensuring that child protection is a cross-cutting theme in Indonesia’s development planning means that the multiple ministries with direct responsibility for child protection and those with indirect responsibility have the foundations of a coordinated system. It can be argued that UNICEF’s support to BAPPENAS and their strong working relationship is a fundamental demonstration of implementing a systems building approach.
5.3. Alignment with UNICEF’s global and regional equity agenda
Finding #3
The systems building approach to child protection in Indonesia focuses on “all vulnerable children” but does not reflect an equity lens.
According to UNICEF, “equity means that all children have an opportunity to survive, develop and reach their full potential, without discrimination, bias or favouritism’’.[23] UNICEF’s support to systems building approach to child protection is closely aligned to several elements in its equity agenda, such as targeting marginalised and vulnerable groups (e.g. children living in institutions). Placing the equity agenda in full as a fundamental tenet of building a child protection system in Indonesia still needs to take place as currently the language of the Country Programme Action Plan focuses on “all vulnerable children” rather than more nuanced articulation of approaching the systems through an equity lens.
Unpacking “all vulnerable children” and UNICEF’s equity agenda needs to take place through discourse and the development of principles for the child protection system that the agency and its partners are aiming to build. In practice, in Indonesia, as with many countries in the region, the beginnings of building a child protection system has centred on formal structures in response to children who experience abuse, violence and exploitation (i.e. tertiary services).[18] This is an important element of the child protection system, which needs to be placed within a wider framework of responding at primary and secondary level interventions to target services at vulnerable children, and identify proactive strategies of outreach. Evidence was not forthcoming during the evaluation of the system being developed through an equity lens, i.e. ensuring that children and families have the same opportunity to access resources (in this case, services).
14 RPJMN 2015-2019 Book 2, Part 2.3.10 on policy direction and strategy
38
39
5.4. Meeting the needs of building a child protection system
Finding #4
The systems building approach has contributed to the inclusion of central child protection system components as defined in the UNICEF conceptual framework.
The relevance of the systems building approach to Indonesia’s context strongly resonated with the majority of respondents in this evaluation. However, the interviews and focus group discussions with respondents at provincial and district levels demonstrated that they struggled to imagine a systems approach, and remained fixed on deciphering what the Conceptual Framework and components of the child protection system should look like in reality.
UNICEF’s articulation of the systems building approach Conceptual Framework does not create clear definitions tailored to the different Indonesian contexts, including definitions of “system” and key sub-systems such as “social welfare system” or “behaviour change system”.
According to UNICEF literature, the systems building approach in Indonesia centres on creating and strengthening the protective environment. This is in line with UNICEF’s 2008 global Child Protection Strategy [24] which defines eight broad elements of the Protective Environment Framework, set out originally in the 2002 UNICEF Operational Guidance Note. According to the global strategy, these elements together describe National Protection Systems and also Social Change. The global strategy distinguishes between the elements that the state has responsibility for and the areas which require wider civil society and community engagement.
In summary, the systems building approach conceptual framework (Figure 1) is too simplistic, and the UNICEF regional mapping and assessment toolkit[1] is inaccessible to those who did not participate in the mapping processes. In both cases, a process of customising the Conceptual Framework or the mapping to Indonesia’s specific political, geographical and cultural contexts is not obvious.15 At the other end of the spectrum, the Governance Indicator Framework is highly detailed. It provides a new framework for benchmarking progress, as well as a much more comprehensive baseline, although only in relation to what the government is responsible for (i.e. community-based responses and engagement are not defined).
Based on the experience of UNICEF and the Government, and the research on child protection to date that has come out of Indonesia and the region,[22] the evaluation team proposes a roadmap below (Figure 6) with example pre-conditions. Each of the five main areas has its own detailed roadmap with pre-conditions as well which are discussed throughout this report in later sections and included in Annex 7 for ease of reference.
15 The mapping exercises that took place in six provinces seems to have overlaid the systems building approach conceptual paradigm over the status quo rather than start from the identification of how children were currently protected, and how this can be built on. Subsequently there are not ongoing mappings which attempt to capture the wide variety of adat (customs) across Indonesia that may have protective or responsive advantages for children, and neither is there identification of cultural practices which are harmful to children.
39
40
Figure 6: Proposed roadmap - child protection system with suggested pre-conditions
Shift from single issue to comprehensiv e sy stems approach
Balance between prev ention and response serv ices
Nat
ion
al C
hild
Pro
tect
ion
Sys
tem
Hum an Resources and
Capacity
Structures and m andates
Financial resources
Delivery of social welfare
and child protection
services
Legal and regulatory fram ework
Role of civ il society in serv ice deliv ery is incorporated into national strategy
Communities can access gov ernment social serv ices
Role of community leaders is recognised and defined
Communities hav e appropriate expectations of serv ices
Community -based child welfare and protection is recognised and supported
Calculating child protection expenditure
Public expenditure on social welfare
External funding
Gov ernment child protection budgeting
Sub-national coordinating committee or mechanisms
Specialised structures and institutions
Traditional or informal community leaders
National coordinating committee or mechanism
Lead agency with primary responsibility for child welfare and
protection
Local lev el structures
There are sufficient numbers of professionally trained social welfare staff
Geographic distribution of social welfare staff is ev en and/or on the basis of need
Capacity of health, education and legal professionals is increased
The roles and expectations of v olunteer and community human resources are
clearly defined
A strategy in place for the professionalisation of social work
40
41
The intention of presenting these roadmaps is to form an intermediate step in understanding between the simplicity of the Conceptual Framework and the complexity of the Government Indicator Framework. A request from government respondents was for the evaluation to articulate what the next steps are in building the child protection system. The roadmaps do not articulate themselves what the next steps should be, but are intended to be used as tools for UNICEF and key stakeholders including the government, define for themselves what the system should contain, and what the next steps should be.
The roadmap above builds on the original systems building approach Conceptual Framework and could form the basis of a theory of change going forward. Within a theory of change, inputs, activities and assumptions can be articulated which allow for decision making and prioritisation in determining next steps.
Box: From single-issue to holistic response
Until recently, the concept of child welfare services in Indonesia has been limited almost exclusively to institutional care. While social protection schemes were mentioned by some Government respondents, they were viewed purely as cash transfer programmes. Panti Sosial Asuhan Anak (pantis or residential care homes) exist because of the Government’s duty of care to protect poor and vulnerable children. In cases of neglect, abuse, criminal behaviour and poverty, families bring their children to the panti which accepts them.
There are a significant number of children in institutional care, which has proved an obvious starting point for UNICEF’s efforts to change the way that children’s needs are met. The Government’s adoption of the change from institutional care to family based case is clear in policy,[25] but in practice the possible responses needed to replace institutional care were not clearly articulated by respondents who were unsure of what they might or could consist of. This represents a serious gap in knowledge, and not one that is easily or quickly filled because there are so few examples in the country. Professional rather than community-based social services and social workers are not part of the national experience.
The continued existence of the panti system presents an opportunity to reorganise the existing child protection system through the reallocation of resources, for example by transforming pantis into services that support children within the care of their families.
41
42
5.5. UNICEF’s role in building Indonesia’s child protection system
Finding #5
UNICEF has the potential to make explicit and effective its unique role in managing evidence emerging from pilots.
In promoting the systems building approach to child protection UNICEF has to date primarily focussed on ‘upstream’ national and provincial level support because the focus has been putting in place the legal and policy framework which underpins a child protection system.
For example, a key activity in promoting a systems building approach to child protection at the province (and district level) has been the ‘Child Protection Training’ delivered by Government partners and supported by UNICEF. This was reportedly valuable for participants in understanding what the systems building approach is aiming for, although challenges remain in that it is not clear whether there are plans for follow up training and support for the participants, or whether the training will be repeated for more participants – a key consideration in the context of high levels of staff rotation within the civil service.
At the same time, UNICEF recognises that whilst buy-in and capacity at these levels is extremely important, services are located at district level and below. It is these decision makers, service providers and families who have the ultimate responsibility for the direct protection of children within the child protection system. At these levels, the appetite for the systems building approach to child protection among stakeholders is high, but the speed at which services can be designed and implemented is slow.
There are two main risks to the commitment and enthusiasm of Government stakeholders who are caught in the middle of this gap:
There is room for ambiguity and misunderstanding about the systems building approach to child protection because stakeholders do not have enough information about what it consists of or examples of seeing its components manifested in practice.16
Commitment and enthusiasm may wane and turn to frustration or fatigue with the idea before elements of the child protection system have had a chance to be implemented or results demonstrated.
16 It appears that the systems building approach has been understood as a child protection ‘programme’ or service per se; it seems to be talked about as a model to implement rather than as an approach to guide and direct decision-making. It is not always understood as the lens through which to make choices about the type of system that best fits the Indonesian context. For example, many stakeholders talked about raising awareness of the systems building approach – while it is helpful that the concept has gained traction, it is clearly not understood as an approach. It is not possible for national and district levels to advocate with their local level partners to institute the systems building approach when there is such a confused understanding of the concept.
42
43
However, there are activities happening at sub-national and district levels, which many participants in this evaluation were not necessarily aware of.
Recently UNICEF has initiated the process to support the ‘child protection and social work area based pilot’ projects.[26] These are necessarily limited in scope and size, and UNICEF and the Government partners will test their effectiveness and impact, and identify strategies to replicate or bring them to scale.
The theme of pilots recurred in this evaluation and could be an area of downstream work that UNICEF prioritises as one its key contributions to systems building approach to child protection in Indonesia. This would entail continuing to investigate with the Government suitable experimental pilot initiatives and implementing them, and developing a strategy to collate and analyse the evidence from the pilots and their likely applicability to replication or scaling. This strategy could include evidence from pilots invested in by other agencies, development partners and non-governmental organisations.
5.6. Perceptions of child protection and systems building
Finding #6
There is no shared understanding of the vision for or terminology in relation to building a child protection system.
There is no shared understanding of the vision or strategy for building a child protection system among Government stakeholders at national, provincial and district levels. In addition, the “systems building approach” continues to be interpreted in many different ways and there are a variety of meanings attributed to the terms. One very clear finding of this evaluation was that amongst and between respondents, there are varied understandings and definitions of:
what child protection is
what a child protection system is
what a child protection system is in the Indonesian context
what the systems building approach to child protection is
A comprehensive definition of a systems building approach per se has not been defined, but is implicit in the terminology of the Conceptual Framework (Figure 2). The terms ‘framework’, ‘model’, ‘system’ and ‘approach’ have been used seemingly interchangeably by stakeholders, including UNICEF. During the evaluation, it became apparent that amongst government respondents, the understanding of a systems building approach varies greatly. The process of defining a systems building approach in the Indonesian context is happening at the same time as the system (legislation, services, coordination mechanisms) is itself being rolled-out. This means that whilst trying to bring together individual components of a system fit for the Indonesian context, respondents have been grappling with an approach that is itself maturing. During the interviewing phase of this evaluation, it
43
44
was clear that there was a range of ideas amongst respondents about what a systems building approach actually is, or rather what it could mean in Indonesia’s context.
As the findings show later, the idea of a systems approach to child protection is now widely accepted, and the process going forward might benefit from dropping the “SBA” terminology and focus more simply on the ‘child protection system’.
Although many respondents could articulate the fact that a systems approach to child protection is a holistic strengthening of networks of interrelated governance processes and service provision, the majority of respondents were not able to provide a more detailed or nuanced definition. Language used to describe the “SBA” seemed to refer to the Conceptual Framework (Figure 2) as a programmeor model to be implemented rather than an approach i.e. a way of doing something. A major reason for this conclusion was, that despite numerous respondents at all levels of Government describing themselves as “SBA Facilitators”, none were able to explain what that meant and they referred to the systems building approach as if they were describing a project or an entity, rather than an idea which influenced their thinking and practices. Described as a programme, it is not surprising that respondents tend to develop or implement child protection in a somewhat ‘mechanical’ way, focused on ensuring that the five central components are present in some way.
Here are examples of the ways in which “SBA” was understood among respondents in different provinces and at different levels of government.
The systems building approach to child protection was understood in a district in Central Java to be an extension of single-issue responses at community and villages levels: teams of five volunteers have taken on one each of the Government’s five priority single issues (e.g. trafficking, children in conflict with the law etc.).17 The result is that these individuals take responsibility for raising awareness about their specific issues, rather than respond to individuals affected. Anecdotally and according to some civil servants at district level, this division of responsibility had the tendency to result in deferrals (rather than referrals) to the different community members with responsibility if a child was affected by more than one issue. For example, rather than recognise two layers of vulnerability in a child who was in conflict with the law and who was also affected by physical violence, community members were sometimes not be able to agree on who should take responsibility for referring them to services.
In all three provinces visited as part of this evaluation, some respondents understood a systems building approach to be ‘working together’, specifically coordination between services and across departments. Closer examination about what people meant by ‘coordination’ showed that generally this meant communication rather than strategically
17 The evaluation could not find specific references in writing regarding the replication of responsibility for single-issues among members of community child protection. The mechanisms of Kelompok Perlindungan Anak Desa KPAD (Village's Child Protection Committee) are cited in reference to both government and non-government initiatives. The main function of KPADs is prevention of abuse/exploitation of children, but their functions may also extend to responding and referring child protection cases.
44
45
working together to leverage services and prevent duplication of effort. On paper and in any “coordination meeting” everybody agrees on “comprehensive actions”, but at implementation level, each Government agency follows strict budget nomenclatures, so individuals felt unable to do anything creative or practical.18 In this way, a systems building approach to child protection was an idea that things should be joined up, but did not manifest improved collaboration and coordination in practice.
In Central Java, especially Surakarta, the system building approach was understood as the fulfilment of child rights. The local Government started to build a system to promote broad child rights in 2006, prior to the new global strategies that introduced the narrower idea of creating systems for protecting children. Surakarta adopted the ‘Child Friendly City’ as the basic standard in relation to the fulfilment of child rights. Compared to other districts in Indonesia, the child protection system in Surakarta was more advanced in the sense that it has been strengthened by local regulations from across sectors. Child protection has been integrated in local development planning and strengthened by local regulations related to prevention and service provision. The Child Friendly City initiative was the reflection of how child protection works in a system as respondents in this area saw it. As child protection was integrated strongly in the local development planning, Bappeda (regional development planning board) played a significant role in encouraging cross sectoral work in developing and strengthening this child protection system through forming the Child Friendly City taskforce. Beyond the varying interpretations19 of the Child Friendly City initiative, and even within it, Government respondents repeatedly reported that they were not entirely sure what exactly they were supposed to be doing. In reality the Child Friendly City initiative is still a very sectoral focussed programme and there is little evidence of clear results for children themselves.[27]
A more mixed group of government and non-state stakeholders in South Sulawesiconsidered the idea of a child protection system as an opportunity to change people’s thinking and behavior, and consider how to prevent child protection problems occurring. South Sulawesi provided, therefore, a different perspective in strengthening the child protection system because they emphasized prevention through education, research to produce a database on child protection, engagement with higher education institutes, mainstreaming child protection in higher education curriculum and engaging religious leaders to support behaviour change. The Government stakeholders in South Sulawesi were motivated to take this prevention approach because of its awareness of the cultural context of the acceptance of physical punishment in educating and disciplining children. The provincial Government of South Sulawesi made an effort to institutionalize the child protection system through local regulations and recently followed up with the development of local action plans in child protection. The local action plan was a reflection of a directory of actors work in child
18 Respondents frequently mentioned their budget constraints in this regard. Each institution’s activities are guided by their budgetary structure that follows the regulations set up by Ministry of Home Affairs.
19 For example, in some places it involves construction (e.g .building play parks) and in others it involves advocacy for nutrition.
45
46
protection. South Sulawesi provincial government respondents understood the systems building approach as a collaborative effort with different partners in child protection, however there was a challenge with the different perceptions of child protection. Most Government staff did not articulate in-depth understanding about child protection, making it difficult for them to plan a programme based on child protection principles.
Building a child protection system in Aceh has been a long process borne out of the need to respond to children affected by conflict and natural disasters. Acehnese children face a different plight than children from the rest of the regions in Indonesia. Thirty years of conflict and a devastating earthquake and tsunami in 2004 left many children traumatized and orphaned. As a result, local, national and international support has focused on psychological trauma healing, inheritance and guardianship issues in the past decade, as well as significant and continuous efforts to promote the protection of Acehnese children’s rights through campaign and awareness raising activities. Many different approaches were used which caused duplication and a lack of cohesion. There was an effort to coordinate these initiatives through several strategies: firstly, through a local coordination mechanism (UN, NGO, Government humanitarian coordination) and secondly through issuing standards on child protection during emergency responses and reconstruction phases and third, through supporting national regulations, e.g. the Ministry of Social Affairs’ regulations on family reunification and child trafficking. Stakeholders in Aceh noted that child protection needs a multi-sector response and collaboration among “sub-systems” such as justice, health, education, social welfare and culture sectors. For them, the systems building approach means working together. The local government in Aceh strengthened the child protection system through the establishment of a child protection unit in Aceh’s Department of Social Affairs and child protection bodies in sub-districts; revision of laws and policies on child protection including the promotion/regulation of family-based care for children without parental care; a rise in numbers of trained social workers and child protection staff; and a huge increase in Government allocations to child protection and social welfare. In Aceh, the coordination aspects of the systems building approach focused on shared monitoring systems linking individual work plans rather than overall coordination. There was a strong feeling that coordination and communication should be prioritized at the implementation level, particularly as some of the regulations were seen as confusing.
46
47
6.Effectiveness
6.1.Defining effectiveness
The international definition for effectiveness is: ‘A measure of the extent to which an aid activity attains its objectives.’[20] However, effectiveness also needs to be seen in the light of context, particularly as the systems building approach to child protection aims to deliver macro reform across Indonesia’s unique and diverse contexts of population, geography, socio-economic status, religion and culture. Effectiveness therefore is contingent upon and must be considered in light of these factors.
Mid-term reviews of the UNICEF country programme and annual reviews/updates of the results framework provided data on progress against each of the programme component and intermediate results.[19, 28] These results, self-reported by UNICEF, are summarised below in Figure 7. 20 This evaluation reviewed whether there were elements of the systems building approach not reflected within the CPAP Results Matrix, and whether risks were built into the design of the framework.
6.2. Child protection system outcomes (results)
Finding #7
There are assumptions inherent in the logic of the Results Framework that need further testing before the indicators/targets can be shown to fully reflect successful achievement of the Intermediate Results and the Programme Component Results
The Results of the Country Programme Action Plan (CPAP) correspond to the objectives and activities of systems building approach to child protection, and the indicators are being met (or are on track to be met) as they are currently articulated, with the exception of 4.1.1 (Figure 7).
On examination of the Intermediate Results (short term outcomes) and Programme Component Results (long term outcomes) outlined in the Country Programme Action Plan, it is apparent that the elements of the Systems Building Approach Conceptual Framework are addressed. However, at this stage the Programme Component Results (long term outcomes) are highly ambitious and the evaluation suggests that they are not on track to be met by 2015, nor is it reasonable to expect that they will be due to their long term nature. The different Programme Component Results seemingly demonstrate a number of contradictions within them, and the sustainability of the approach would be greatly improved by reworking the matrix and testing the connections between the proposed activities and the results.
One example where such a mismatch is seen when the Country Programme Action Plan states an intention to address the causes of children’s vulnerability to abuse, violence and exploitation.
20 An indicative Theory of Change based on the 2011-2015 Country Programme Results for Child Protection can be found in Section 4.
47
48
Specifically, it stresses the need to develop ‘strategies in response to the underlying causes of vulnerability’.[19] Likewise the key results aim to ensure that all ‘vulnerable children are progressively protected by comprehensive, community-based child protection systems’. However, the actual strategies that are employed to achieve these important goals do not respond to the underlying causes of vulnerability. For example, given the need to enhance the protection of children affected or living with HIV, protective initiatives or interventions could have been aligned to wider efforts of other ministries and agencies to prevent rates of infection. In the same way, rather than relying on institutions to shelter children affected by HIV, strategies for community support and programmes to bolster kinship care could have been strengthened; in the longer term, such programmes may well have prevented or reduced the vulnerability of orphans and families affected by HIV.
Similarly, there are other challenges in the design of the results matrix, including for example:
Comprehensive community based child protection system (4.1). As stated, there are in fact few activities that correspond with this intended result because most activities are broader, national level endeavours and unlikely to affect community level protection. Based on these expected results it is not clear whether the intention is to work primarily at national level or strengthen community level, or both.
Strategy for strengthening child protection system into child and family welfare system established at national level (4.1.4). Without a clear rationale and explanation, it is not clear what such a strategy intends. It may be a question of terminology but there is no discussion about how or if the system will be expanded to cover wider issues of child and family welfare.
National strategy on violence against children prevention developed and tested (4.1.5). The framework states the intention to support the development of a child protection system, and includes a strategy dedicated to ‘violence against children’.21 It could be assumed that the strategy of building a child protection system inherently includes measures to prevent and respond to violence. The lack of clarity of the relationship between the two strategies may be caused by the limitations inherent in a logical framework or a more fundamental challenge of how to harmonise multiple recommendations.
The current indicators and their targets are not necessarily reflections of the results desired for a comprehensive child protection system. In a number of cases, the achievement of quantitative indicators and targets (e.g. the passing of provincial legislation, or completion of trainings) are assumed to achieve the overall goals. It is, however, not evident that activities and desired results follow such linear trajectories and it is questionable whether some of the stated results are comprehensive enough to claim direct attribution in building of the child protection system. For example, Intermediate Result 4.2.2 states:
21 International literature recommends that every country create a dedicated violence against children strategy with budget and clear targets (e.g. WHO Global Violence Report 2014, UN Special Representative of the Secretary General World Study on Violence against Children 2014)
48
49
“By end of 2014, key Ministries at National and Sub National level have capacity to collect, compile, analyse and utilize child protection data for planning, policy development and budgeting.”[28]
The two associated indicators are the number of workshops (7) on analysing and utilizing data for programming, and the percent of staff (75%) trained in relevant departments on data. The seven workshops were planned to be implemented by the end of 2014. It is not conclusive that conducting workshops on how to use data addresses the structural barriers that the participants face in using their capacity.
Although they are not reflected in the Country Programme Action Plan’s intended activities, UNICEF is implementing a number of important initiatives that contribute to the development child protection system. Of particular importance are the pilots already mentioned, and the PRA (Pesantren Ramah Anak: Child Friendly Pesantren Initiative). There is also work planned that supports the PKSA (Program Kesejahteraan Sosial Anak: Social Welfare Program for Children). These activities reflect some of the recommendations generated by the Six Province Mapping and should be clearly articulated in the Country Programme Action Plan to ensure that their achievements are properly recorded and acknowledged and that they are linked with the results of the Country Programme.
49
50
UN
ICE
F C
ou
ntr
y P
rog
ram
me
Act
ion
Pla
n (
CP
AP
) fo
r C
hil
d P
rote
ctio
n 2
011
-20
15
Pro
gra
mm
e C
om
po
ne
nt
Re
sult
Ind
ica
tors
Ta
rge
tS
tatu
s o
f In
dic
ato
r
PC
R 4
.1 B
y 2
015
, a
ll
vu
lne
rab
le c
hil
dre
n a
re
pro
gre
ssiv
ely
pro
tect
ed
by
com
pre
he
nsi
ve
an
d
com
mu
nit
y- b
ase
d c
hil
d
pro
tect
ion
sys
tem
(e
.g.
soci
al
we
lfa
re,
po
lice
, a
nd
ju
stic
e)
esp
eci
all
y in
5 f
ocu
s p
rov
ince
s.
4.1
(a)
Com
pre
hen
sive
ch
ild
pro
tect
ion
re
spon
se is
eff
ecti
vely
coo
rdin
ated
an
d
del
iver
ed t
hro
ugh
inte
r-m
inis
teri
al
coor
din
atio
n m
ech
anis
m
Cen
tral
leve
l pol
icie
s an
d S
tan
dar
d
Op
erat
ing
Pro
ced
ure
s st
ream
lin
ed in
to
cen
tral
coo
rdin
atio
n t
hat
tra
nsl
ate
into
ac
tion
at
sub
nat
ion
al le
vel.
ON
TR
AC
K G
uid
elin
es f
or c
omp
reh
ensi
ve c
hil
d p
rote
ctio
n
regu
lati
on o
utl
inin
g m
ult
i-se
ctor
al m
ech
anis
m a
t su
b n
atio
nal
leve
l fi
nal
ized
4.1
(b)
Nu
mbe
r of
pro
vin
cial
an
d d
istr
ict
Gov
ern
men
ts im
ple
men
t ke
y ce
ntr
al le
vel
pol
icie
s w
hic
h a
re s
up
por
ted
wit
h
adeq
uat
e go
vern
men
t bu
dge
t
Fiv
e fo
cus
pro
vin
ces
& s
elec
ted
dis
tric
ts
hav
e fu
lly
adop
ted
nat
ion
al p
lan
of
acti
ons
& p
rogr
amm
e on
ch
ild
pro
tect
ion
wit
h
suff
icie
nt
bud
get
allo
cati
on &
per
iod
ical
ly
revi
ewed
.
ME
TC
omp
reh
ensi
ve c
hil
d p
rote
ctio
n r
egu
lati
on h
as b
een
ad
opte
d in
C
entr
al J
ava,
Eas
t N
usa
Ten
ggar
a an
d W
est
Sula
wes
i a
nd
bei
ng
del
iber
ated
in W
est
Sula
wes
i an
d E
ast
Java
.
Inte
rme
dia
te R
esu
ltIn
dic
ato
rT
arg
et
Sta
tus
of
Ind
ica
tor
IR 4
.1.1
By
2014
, sel
ecte
d c
hil
d
pro
tect
ion
-rel
ated
law
s an
d
pol
icie
s ar
e d
raft
ed a
t n
atio
nal
an
d in
4 p
rovi
nce
s.
IR S
tatu
s: O
N T
RA
CK
4.1
.1(a
) N
um
ber
of P
rovi
nce
s w
hic
h h
ave
dra
fted
Ch
ild
Pro
tect
ion
PE
RD
A.
4 P
rovi
nce
sM
ET
4 p
rovi
nce
s n
amel
y: A
ceh
, Cen
tral
Jav
a, N
TT
an
d S
outh
Su
law
esi
adop
ted
Ch
ild
Pro
tect
ion
PE
RD
A, t
wo
pro
vin
ces
Wes
t Su
law
esi
and
Eas
t Ja
va in
th
e p
roce
ss o
f d
elib
erat
ing
the
dra
ft r
egu
lati
on.
4.1
.1 (
b) J
uve
nil
e Ju
stic
e B
ill i
n d
iscu
ssio
n
in P
arli
amen
t (y
/n)
Bil
l bef
ore
Par
liam
ent
ME
TL
aw o
n J
uve
nil
e C
rim
inal
Ju
stic
e Sy
stem
ad
opte
d in
20
12.
Ad
dit
ion
ally
, ch
apte
r of
Law
on
Cor
rect
ion
wit
h s
pec
ific
foc
us
on
chap
ter
for
chil
dre
n h
as b
een
dra
fted
wit
h s
up
por
t fr
om U
NIC
EF
4.1.
1 (c
) w
het
her
rev
ised
rec
omm
end
atio
ns
for
imp
rovi
ng
Bir
th R
egis
trat
ion
at
nat
ion
al a
nd
su
b-n
atio
nal
leve
l are
in p
lace
(y
/n)
Rev
ised
rec
omm
end
atio
ns
in p
lace
CO
NST
RA
INE
DP
lan
to
con
du
ct e
valu
atio
n o
n B
R s
trat
egy
of 2
011
un
der
way
50
51
IR 4
.1.2
By
2015
, min
istr
ies
and
re
late
d in
stit
uti
ons
at n
atio
nal
le
vel a
nd
in 5
pro
vin
ces
hav
e d
evel
oped
tec
hn
ical
an
d
imp
lem
enti
ng
regu
lati
ons
and
in
crea
sed
th
e ca
pac
ity
of h
um
an
reso
urc
es in
lin
e w
ith
th
e Ju
ven
ile
Just
ice
syst
em L
aw a
nd
in
tern
atio
nal
sta
nd
ard
s.
IR S
tatu
s: O
N T
RA
CK
4.1
.2 (
a) W
het
her
or
not
nat
ion
al P
olic
e h
ave
inte
grat
ed J
ust
ice
for
Ch
ild
ren
into
tr
ain
ing
mod
ule
s (y
/n)
Tra
inin
g m
odu
les
wh
ich
in a
ccor
dan
ce
wit
h t
he
new
Ju
ven
ile
Just
ice
Bil
l d
evel
oped
ME
TT
rain
ing
Mod
ule
for
Pol
ice
avai
labl
e; T
oT f
or P
olic
e In
stru
ctor
s fr
om N
atio
nal
Pol
ice
Sch
ool (
SP
N)
and
from
Pol
ice
Tra
inin
g A
gen
cy (
LE
MD
IKP
OL
)
4.1.
2 (b
) W
het
her
or
not
Cor
rect
ion
s h
as
dev
elop
ed S
OP
on
Ju
stic
e fo
r C
hil
dre
n
(y/n
)
Stan
dar
d O
per
atin
g P
roce
du
re o
n ju
stic
e fo
r ch
ild
ren
dev
elop
edO
N T
RA
CK
D
raft
of S
OP
an
d g
ener
al g
uid
elin
es o
n ju
stic
e fo
r ch
ild
ren
has
be
en d
raft
ed b
y M
oLH
R (
DG
Cor
rect
ion
). A
dd
itio
nal
ly, r
oad
map
to
acce
lera
te t
he
imp
lem
enta
tion
of
the
Juve
nil
e Ju
stic
e L
aw h
as b
een
d
evel
oped
wit
h G
over
nm
ent
fun
din
g (A
PB
N 2
012
– 2
013
).
IR 4
.1.3
B
y th
e en
d o
f 20
15,
coor
din
atio
n o
n c
hil
d p
rote
ctio
n
are
effe
ctiv
ely
imp
lem
ente
d a
t th
e n
atio
nal
leve
l an
d in
Cen
tral
&
Eas
t Ja
va, A
ceh
, Sou
th a
nd
Wes
t Su
law
esi,
and
Eas
t N
usa
T
engg
ara.
IR
Sta
tus:
ME
T
4.1.
3 (a
) N
um
ber
of P
rovi
nce
s w
ith
car
ried
ou
t C
hil
d P
rote
ctio
n S
yste
ms
Map
pin
g co
mp
lete
d.
5 P
rovi
nce
sM
ET
Ch
ild
pro
tect
ion
sys
tem
map
pin
g co
nd
uct
ed in
6 p
rovi
nce
s.
Ad
dit
ion
ally
, tra
inin
g to
olki
t on
ch
ild
pro
tect
ion
sys
tem
an
d
map
pin
g to
ol a
vail
able
an
d jo
int-
mon
itor
ing
con
du
cted
in E
ast
Java
. Th
e go
vern
men
t h
as a
lso
init
iate
d t
rain
ing
on s
yste
m-b
ased
on
ch
ild
pro
tect
ion
in J
ambi
, Ria
u, B
engk
ulu
, Bal
i, Su
lsel
, Su
ltra
, Su
lten
g, M
alu
ku, K
alti
m, N
TB
)
IR 4
.1.4
By
the
end
of
2015
, a
stra
tegy
for
stre
ngt
hen
ing
chil
d
pro
tect
ion
sys
tem
into
ch
ild
an
d
fam
ily
wel
fare
sys
tem
est
abli
shed
at
nat
ion
al le
vel.
IR S
tatu
s: O
N T
RA
CK
4.1
.4 (
a) A
vail
abil
ity
of a
ctio
n p
lan
(y/
nP
lan
of
Act
ion
to
stre
ngt
hen
ch
ild
p
rote
ctio
n s
yste
m in
to c
hil
d a
nd
fam
ily
wel
fare
sys
tem
com
ple
ted
ON
TR
AC
K
Dra
ft f
ram
ewor
k on
th
e st
ren
gth
enin
g of
ch
ild
pro
tect
ion
sys
tem
an
d s
ocia
l wor
k sy
stem
dev
elop
ed f
rom
th
e Sc
opin
g d
one
by t
he
Gri
ffit
h U
niv
ersi
ty. C
ond
uct
ed; 4
8 t
rain
ers
pas
sed
th
e T
OT
on
ch
ild
p
rote
ctio
n fo
r so
cial
wor
kers
th
rou
gh t
he
SW r
egio
nal
tra
inin
g ce
ntr
es; C
hil
d p
rote
ctio
n is
incl
ud
ed o
n t
he
trai
nin
g p
rogr
amm
e p
rior
ity
of t
he
Reg
ion
al T
rain
ing
cen
tres
on
SW
; Gu
idel
ines
for
im
ple
men
tin
g tr
ain
ing
for
soci
al w
orke
rs a
vail
able
; mod
el o
f in
terv
enti
on o
n s
tren
gth
enin
g th
e qu
alit
y of
car
e in
inst
itu
tion
s an
d
on f
amil
y-ba
sed
car
e d
evel
oped
. Pre
par
atio
n o
n t
he
dev
elop
men
t of
th
e in
tegr
ated
soc
ial w
elfa
re p
rogr
amm
e w
hic
h in
tegr
ates
ch
ild
p
rote
ctio
n a
nd
fam
ily
wel
fare
51
52
4.1.
5 B
y 20
15 N
atio
nal
Str
ateg
y on
Vio
len
ce a
gain
st C
hil
dre
n
pre
ven
tion
dev
elop
ed a
nd
tes
ted
. IR
Sta
tus:
ON
TR
AC
K
4.1
.5 (
a) A
vail
abil
ity
of S
tan
dar
ds
of
Serv
ice
(y/n
)St
and
ard
s of
Ser
vice
dra
fted
On
tra
ck
At
nat
ion
al le
vel,
init
ial d
iscu
ssio
ns
carr
ied
ou
t w
ith
MoE
C a
nd
M
OR
A t
o ad
dre
ss v
iole
nce
aga
inst
ch
ild
ren
in e
du
cati
on s
etti
ngs
; “l
esso
ns
lear
ned
” on
th
e im
ple
men
tati
on o
f ch
ild
-fri
end
ly
pes
an
tren
incl
ud
ing
dev
elop
men
t of
SO
P is
ava
ilab
le; o
ngo
ing
inte
rven
tion
s on
pre
ven
tion
of v
iole
nce
th
rou
gh s
choo
ls in
Jat
eng,
Ja
tim
, NT
T, S
ula
wes
i, A
ceh
an
d P
apu
a
Pro
gra
mm
e C
om
po
ne
nt
Re
sult
Ind
ica
tors
Ta
rge
tS
tatu
s o
f In
dic
ato
r
PC
R 4
.2 B
y 20
15, d
ecis
ion
mak
ers
at n
atio
nal
an
d s
ub
nat
ion
al le
vels
h
ave
acce
ss t
o an
d u
tili
ze a
co
mp
reh
ensi
ve m
onit
orin
g an
d
dat
a co
llec
tion
sys
tem
s on
ch
ild
p
rote
ctio
n fo
r p
olic
y, p
lan
nin
g an
d b
ud
geti
ng
pu
rpos
es.
Com
pre
hen
sive
Ch
ild
Pro
tect
ion
In
form
atio
n M
anag
emen
t Sy
stem
is
est
abli
shed
wit
h k
ey li
ne
min
istr
ies
uti
lizi
ng
the
dat
a fo
r p
olic
y, p
lan
nin
g, a
nd
bu
dge
tin
g p
urp
oses
.
Fu
lly
fun
ded
CP
IMS
is e
stab
lish
ed in
5
focu
s d
istr
icts
an
d s
elec
ted
pro
vin
ces.
ON
TR
AC
K
Pro
toco
l fin
aliz
ed a
nd
tea
m le
ader
tra
inin
g co
nd
uct
ed f
or
gove
rnm
ent-
fun
ded
pre
vale
nce
stu
dy
on V
iole
nce
aga
inst
Ch
ild
ren
. T
rain
ing
and
wor
ksh
op o
n d
ata
on c
hil
d p
rote
ctio
n c
ond
uct
ed in
at
nat
ion
al le
vel a
nd
Cen
tral
Jav
a.
Inte
rme
dia
te R
esu
lts
Ind
ica
tors
Ta
rge
tS
tatu
s o
f In
dic
ato
r
IR 4
.2.1
By
the
end
of 2
012
, th
e p
lan
, pro
toco
l an
d b
ud
get
for
the
Nat
ion
al P
reva
len
ce S
urv
ey o
n
Vio
len
ce a
gain
st C
hil
dre
n
app
rove
d
IR S
tatu
s: M
ET
4.2
.1 V
AC
Stu
dy
in
GO
I’s
2013
bu
dge
t al
loca
tion
s. (
y/n
)
Bu
dge
t al
loca
ted
ME
TG
OI
has
all
ocat
ed 1
.3 b
illi
on r
up
iah
th
rou
gh M
OSA
& M
OW
EC
P t
o co
nd
uct
VA
CS;
Fin
al q
ues
tion
nai
re &
res
pon
se p
lan
dev
elop
ed;
pro
toco
l an
d r
esp
onse
pla
n f
inal
ized
su
bmit
ted
to
Eth
ics
Com
mit
tee;
42
Tea
m L
ead
ers
trai
ned
; su
rvey
wil
l be
un
der
take
n in
20
13
IR 4
.2.2
By
end
of
2014
, key
M
inis
trie
s at
Nat
ion
al a
nd
Su
b N
atio
nal
leve
l hav
e ca
pac
ity
to
coll
ect,
com
pil
e, a
nal
yse
and
u
tili
ze c
hil
d p
rote
ctio
n d
ata
for
pla
nn
ing,
pol
icy
dev
elop
men
t an
d
bud
geti
ng.
IR S
tatu
s: O
N T
RA
CK
4.2
.2 (
a) N
um
ber
of
wor
ksh
ops
in
anal
ysin
g an
d u
tili
zin
g d
ata
for
pro
gram
me
7 w
orks
hop
sO
N T
RA
CK
2
trai
nin
gs a
t n
atio
nal
leve
l con
du
cted
for
50
sta
ff m
embe
rs s
taff
of
MO
WC
P; g
ener
ic m
odu
le f
or t
rain
ing
on c
hil
d p
rote
ctio
n d
ata
and
in
dic
ator
fin
alis
ed b
y M
OW
CP
; wor
ksh
op o
n c
hil
d p
rote
ctio
n
pro
file
con
du
cted
in C
entr
al J
ava
4.2
.2 (
b) P
erce
nt
of s
taff
tra
ined
in
rele
van
t d
epar
tmen
ts o
n d
ata.
75%
of
rele
van
t st
aff
trai
ned
52
53
Pro
gra
mm
e C
om
po
ne
nt
Re
sult
Ind
ica
tor
Ta
rge
tS
tatu
s o
f In
dic
ato
r
PC
R 4
.3 B
y 20
15 t
he
chil
d
pro
tect
ion
em
erge
ncy
p
rep
ared
nes
s an
d r
esp
onse
m
ech
anis
m is
full
y fu
nct
ion
ing
at
nat
ion
al le
vel a
nd
in 3
pro
vin
ces.
Nat
ion
al p
olic
y an
d m
ech
anis
m o
n
emer
gen
cy p
rep
ared
nes
s an
d r
esp
onse
in
corp
orat
ing
chil
d p
rote
ctio
n is
dev
elop
ed
and
imp
lem
ente
d.
Min
istr
y of
Soc
ial A
ffai
rs h
as a
fu
nct
ion
al
Ch
ild
Pro
tect
ion
Em
erge
ncy
Res
pon
se
Tea
m.
ON
TR
AC
K
MO
SA's
CP
IE R
apid
Res
pon
se T
eam
has
bee
n e
stab
lish
ed a
nd
fu
nct
ion
ing.
Inte
rme
dia
te R
esu
ltIn
dic
ato
rT
arg
et
Sta
tus
of
Ind
ica
tor
IR 4
.3.1
By
2013
th
e n
atio
nal
ch
ild
pro
tect
ion
em
erge
ncy
p
rep
ared
nes
s an
d r
esp
onse
m
ech
anis
m is
full
y fu
nct
ion
ing
at
nat
ion
al a
nd
in 5
pro
vin
ces.
IR
Sta
tus:
ME
T
4.3
.1 W
het
her
th
e ch
ild
pro
tect
ion
em
erge
ncy
rea
dy
team
is t
rain
ed a
t th
e n
atio
nal
leve
l (y/
n)
Tra
ined
Ch
ild
Pro
tect
ion
in E
mer
gen
cy
Rap
id R
esp
onse
Tea
m in
MO
SAM
ET
Ch
ild
Pro
tect
ion
in E
mer
gen
cy (
CP
IE)
Rap
id R
esp
onse
Tea
m in
M
OSA
was
est
abli
shed
an
d t
rain
ed, i
ncl
ud
ing
rep
rese
nta
tion
fro
m
8 p
rovi
nce
s.
Fig
ure
7:
UN
ICE
F C
ou
ntr
y P
rog
ram
me
Act
ion
Pla
n w
ith
pro
gre
ss a
ga
inst
ta
rget
s (s
elf-
rep
ort
ed b
y U
NIC
EF
)
53
54
Results of the Systems Mapping Exercise in six provinces of Indonesia
A major and important piece of work that has been undertaken towards implementing a systems building approach to child protection is the systems mapping exercise conducted in six provinces.[6] The key recommendations as outlined in the Issue Brief [29] could form the basis of UNICEF’s strategy for supporting its partners in the future. Many of them also reflect the findings of this evaluation. Explicitly using these recommendations in planning would also comply with the ‘steps’ as outlined in the EAPRO Child Protection Toolkit.22[1]
The move towards a more systemic approach to child protection in Indonesia has perhaps led to the assumption that a formal, statutory-based system – based on western models and largely implemented through government agencies – is the only acceptable permutation of a system. In the absence of familiarity with other system typologies, there is an expectation that UNICEF will support the development of a formal model.
As was demonstrated by the methodology for the Six Province Mapping, when only the formal components of the system were assessed, other protective influences and practices at community level were not regularly considered part of the system. This is problematic because a systems building approach requires contextualisation to the actual situation of children in a certain country. In the myriad Indonesian cultural and bureaucratic contexts, such an approach is essential and would help to recalibrate the system. It is the approach to protecting children that must be foremost rather than the system model per se.
At the moment, the perception of key respondents seems to be that the formal system alone is capable of protecting children. However, the types of national level strategies currently employed only create the framework for the system: there is a need to translate these provisions (legal, policy, coordination, monitoring) into more concrete actions (services) to support those people who have the direct day to day responsibility for the care and protection of children – in particular families and community members. While UNICEF cannot be responsible for implementing services, of course, there is a significant opportunity for UNICEF to realign its activities to ensure that child focussed, community based child protection systems are supported and reinforced, working in harmony with more formal mechanisms. This would be a significant step towards achieving the more community based objectives that have been described in the Country Programme Action Plan.
22 The strategic action for supporting national child protection systems of identifying a minimum package of child protection services, as recommended in UNICEF’s Child Protection Strategy. Standard Minimum of Services for Response, Rehabilitation and Repatriation for Victims of Trafficking; Standard Minimum of Service for prevention and response on Gender-based Violence are both cited as completed in the baseline information of the 2010 Draft Summary Results Matrix: Government of Indonesia – UNICEF Country Programme, 2011 – 2015 (Key ProgressIndicator 4.1.1)
54
55
6.3. Strengthening the elements of the Conceptual Framework
Finding #8
UNICEF’s support to the national child protection system addresses all five elements to varying degrees and there are significant opportunities for this work to be built upon going forward. UNICEF’s own understanding of the degree of this support is greater than that of other key respondents.
According to the Country Programme Action Plan, UNICEF’s programming aims to contribute to the development of a national child protection system by: strengthening service delivery; promoting family based care; and promoting restorative justice. These initiatives are to be based upon evidence and data to inform them. In any system, these kinds of initiatives are essentially found or targeted at community level. They require a nuanced and context-specific adaptation that acknowledges informal and customary practices. However, in reality there is nothing in the Results Framework that supports the development of the system at community level. Rather, the actions focus on the higher or formal levels, rendering it difficult to meet the stated aspirations. In particular, it appears that UNICEF’s initiatives contribute more directly to the establishment of the formal, national level system, notably the development of the 2007 Law on Human Trafficking and adoption of 33 subnational laws, finalisation of the National Plan of Action on Elimination of Violence and revisions to the Juvenile Justice Law. The actions do not directly correspond to the areas that UNICEF describes as priorities.
The stated desire is to work ‘bottom-up’ but all activities indicated a top-down approach (laws, committees, regulations). For example, Focus Area 4 of the revised framework refers to “a comprehensive child protection response being effectively coordinated and delivered through an inter-ministerial coordination mechanism”. This represents a structural, national level initiative (protection-by-meeting) rather than a focus on direct service enhancement at the community level. While a coordination mechanism may set a policy approach and is perhaps required in order to standardise the quality of services, it must also lead to the actual development of services for families and children.
The Country Programme Action Plan refers to the development of a comprehensive and community-based child protection system in 5 provinces, and similarly, the focus of activities is on the development of the formal system. For example, the main focus is on Social Welfare, Police and Juvenile Justice, including development of foster care procedures and guardianship, development of regulations and policy, Standard Operating Procedures, multi-sectoral mechanisms, and plans of action. These are essentially not community based interventions at all, but setting up procedures/interventions at the district or provincial level.
The Country Programme Action Plan does not indicate that different actions will be taken in different places and seems to assume that a comprehensive system model can be implemented across the country. Given the hugely diverse differences throughout Indonesia, there are no actions to ascertain whether a nationwide system model can be uniformly implemented across provinces is realistic (or desirable).
55
56
The following sub-sections discuss each of the five elements of the Conceptual Framework that UNICEF has supported: social welfare systems for children and families; justice system for children; data and information management; social and behavioural change system; and the legal and policy framework.
6.3.1. Social welfare systems for children and families
Supporting the development of the social welfare system is an essential component for protecting children. This is referenced in IR 4.1.4 “By the end of 2015, a strategy for strengthening child protection system into child and family welfare system established at national level”. Although the IR is conceptually not very clear, it suggests that UNICEF is prioritising broader efforts to enhance welfare. This is seen through the Developing Child Protection and Social Work in Indonesia Area Based Pilot Projects[6] and through less direct support to Government programs such as the cash transfer programme.
The delivery of the social welfare systems requires clarity around the organisation of their delivery,the structures that will deliver them, and their capacity to deliver.
Indonesia’s definition of social “services” focuses on institutional care and tertiary interventions to help children at high levels of risk; however, there is a paradigm shift to refocus on “welfare”. 23 Since 2009, the Government has introduced the “Social Welfare Program for Children” (known as PKSA) designed to facilitate responses towards family‐based interventions, but the most recognised or widely known component seems to be the cash transfer element, rather than increasing access to services or activities which strengthen the responsibility of parents, families and communities.
Law 11/2009 on Social Welfare and Law No 13/2011 on Poverty both explicitly highlight professionalising social work practice. Despite this, social work continues to be perceived as "charity" and not a professional job in the social welfare sector.[30] However, there is evidence of nascent social services in the form of the P2TP2A (Pusat Pelayanan Terpadu Pemberdayaan Perempuan dan Anak: Centre of Integrated Services for Women Empowerment and Child Protection) and PPT centres (Pusat Pelayanan Terpadu: Integrated service centres). These are district level services which aim to connect a range of service providers (including health, police, education and legal), thereby creating a more coordinated response to children’s needs. They perform mainly tertiary support services. The service centres visited as part of this evaluation demonstrated levels of connectivity between services in line with the systems building approach. For example, several key institutions and organisations were working together to provide mutual referrals and accompany children through legal and support processes. This included the local clinic, a local child rights NGO, a number of local schools (through the membership of children in the Children’s Forum), and the police. The respondents engaged in the service centres were well aware of the limitations and the vulnerability of the “system” itself. Despite the attempts to use systemic thinking in the design of the system, the realisation is thwarted by the following factors:
23 For victims of abuse, violence and exploitation, or for those who were considered neglected children.
56
57
The reliance on volunteers to provide services. At the P2TP2A this included professional lawyers who volunteered their time and legal expertise.
The limited influence the service had on improving the skills and expertise of the police, who were willing to engage but did not seem to have any incentives to sensitise their responses to children, according to anecdotal reports from participants in this evaluation.24
The lack of resources which precludes proactive and preventive services such as community outreach and identification of cases. The children and families most likely to come into contact with the services, therefore, are with extreme vulnerabilities (e.g. who were referred by the hospital or police) or those with the agency (i.e. education, confidence and resources) to seek out the services.
The nexus of services cannot serve all of its large catchment area. The unit of a district for such a function poses challenges where there are large populations so sub-district level might be considered as a more appropriate for this kind of service.
Knowledge about the service was limited among other respondents in the same district and within the province. This meant that other respondents were unaware of examples of child protection services.
Across the six provinces within which UNICEF and the Government have been focussing, all the sub-systems of a child protection system, as defined in the National Child Protection System Conceptual Framework are present; but the activities and pilots are not all found in any one place. The lack of understanding of the system as a whole, and the complexity of the systems building approach, has created a situation where different parts of Government at provincial and district levels, have picked out components or approaches which they are enthusiastically implementing, but they do not seem able to articulate how their particular component fits in with a wider holistic child protection system, and therefore they do not seem to have a strategy for introducing the other necessary components at a later stage.
The fact that Indonesia’s efforts to protect children are still dominated by single issue-based response raises questions about the perceived relevance of the systems building approach. While the persistence of issue-based services cannot be reduced to a single factor, it should be considered whether stakeholders at least consider alternative approaches as more relevant than a systems building approach. There may be a multitude of factors that determine the current approach to child protection, as is somewhat reflected in the establishment of tertiary focussed social services coordination centres under the Ministry of Social Affairs to act as a central point for reporting and referral. The coordination centre also provides social welfare services, legal support, and conducts
24 From the perspective of two stakeholders who provide direct support to children, there have been instances where the police responding to a crime against a child have treated the victims highly insensitively (e.g. conducting lengthy interrogations without breaks or refreshments, and late into the night).
57
58
awareness activities for the public and in schools. Some provinces were piloting model Social Welfare Service Centres (Puspelkessos) as a focal point at the sub district level and for medical services.
Indonesia has established hospital-based one-stop crisis centres that offer coordinated medical, legal and counselling services for child and adult victims of violence. These centres, however, tend to focus primarily on immediate, crisis-based intervention and often have limited scope to support children and families after they are discharged from hospital. Specialised police units (PPA Pelayanan Perempuan dan Anak) and hospital-based integrated service centres (PPTs and PKTs: Pusat Krisis Terpadu) provide medical care, psychosocial support, legal advice and child-sensitive investigative procedures for child victims of the most serious forms of violence and of trafficking. These service units generally address only the most serious cases. They do not have the mandate or capacity to assess the family environment, or to ensure that children receive appropriate care and protection after they leave the centre.
Family centred vs. institutionalisation
Since adopting the systems building approach, there has been a move towards using residential care as a last resort, and as a temporary solution to cases of violence, abuse or neglect. This is the case in Central Java, South Sulawesi and Aceh. This has necessitated a reimagining of how the child protection system can support children without using an institutional approach to alternative care. To date, the necessary connected suite of services required to support such an approach have not been fully developed. This change in thinking is an important and necessary step; however, in the absence of new community services and family-based support there is a significant risk that vulnerable children currently living in institutions will be left unprotected.
The provincial and district level service providers along with Government departments at all levels are beginning to talk about family based support including parenting programs, child care and welfare support. The Social Welfare Program for Children (PKSA) is intended to have a direct focus on supporting families and presents an opportunity to directly connect with vulnerable children and provide preventative services.
A key way that UNICEF is supporting this move towards deinstitutionalisation is through the Developing Child Protection and Social Work in Indonesia Area Based Pilot Projects that has a particular focus on supporting families and family-based out-of-care services. The results of this pilot may present an important model that can be adapted and applied to other contexts. A review of the PKSA has also been commissioned and is being supported by UNICEF. These activities are not captured by the current CPAP.
Figure 8 below, Delivery of social welfare and child protection services, shows a draft roadmap, based on this evaluation’s enquiry and current thinking on systems building approaches to child protection in the Southeast Asia region. It suggests key pre-conditions that need to be in place, and assigns a colour code to indicate which are currently in place, partially in place, or not yet in place.
58
59
The roadmap includes:
(i) Suggested pre-conditions of the role of government and NGOs in delivering
services:
- Shift from single issue to comprehensive systems approach
- Balance between prevention and response services
- Role of civil society in service delivery is incorporated into national strategy
(ii) Suggested pre-conditions of the role of communities and community
structures in accessing formal services and providing informal responses:
- Communities can access government social services
- Role of community leaders is recognised and defined
- Communities have appropriate expectations of services
- Community-based child welfare and protection is recognised and supported
The purpose of expressing the delivery of social services through a draft roadmap is to provide a tool that UNICEF, the government and wider stakeholders can adapt and develop as appropriate. It is intended to form an intermediate planning and prioritisation tool which sits between the Conceptual Framework and the Governance Indicators Framework.
59
60
Fig
ure
8:
Pro
po
sed
ro
ad
ma
p -
Del
iver
yo
f so
cia
l w
elfa
re a
nd
ch
ild
pro
tect
ion
ser
vic
es
In p
lace
Par
tial
ly in
pla
ce
Not
yet
in p
lace
Spec
ialis
ed p
olic
e u
nit
s co
ndu
ct f
oren
sic
inve
stig
atio
ns
and
purs
ue
pros
ecu
tion
of
the
alle
ged
offe
nde
r
Soci
al w
elfa
re a
gen
cies
pro
vide
a r
ange
of
con
tin
ued
su
ppor
t se
rvic
es f
or c
hild
ren
an
d f
amili
es
Pro
fess
ion
als
hav
e re
alis
tic
and
wor
kabl
e gu
idan
ce f
or
wor
kin
g w
ith
ch
ildre
n a
nd
thei
r fa
mili
es
Com
mu
nit
ies
and
fam
ilies
reg
ard
resp
onse
ser
vice
s as
ap
prop
riat
e an
d ac
cess
ible
Ba
lan
ce b
etw
een
pre
ven
tio
n a
nd
re
spo
nse
ser
vic
es
Res
pon
se s
ervi
ces
are
sim
plif
ied
but
still
pro
vide
ele
vate
d le
vel o
f pr
otec
tion
Spec
ialis
ed p
olic
e u
nit
s fo
cus
on v
iole
nce
aga
inst
wom
en
and
child
ren
Hu
man
an
d fi
nan
cial
res
ourc
es a
re a
vaila
ble
to e
stab
lish
ta
ilore
d ca
re p
lan
s an
d m
anag
e th
e re
cove
ry o
f vi
ctim
s
Gov
ern
men
t so
cial
wor
kers
are
abl
e to
impl
emen
t th
e pr
otoc
ols
and
stan
dard
s th
at a
re s
upp
osed
to
guid
e th
eir
deci
sion
mak
ing,
mak
e ap
prop
riat
e re
ferr
als
and
follo
w u
p m
onit
orin
g
Res
po
nse
ser
vic
es
Hea
lth
pra
ctit
ion
ers
are
trai
ned
to
dete
ct a
nd
trea
t ch
ild
vict
ims
of a
buse
an
d n
egle
ct a
nd
man
date
d to
pro
vide
m
edic
al c
are
Spec
ialis
ed p
olic
e u
nit
s pr
ovid
e le
gal a
dvic
e to
vic
tim
s an
d th
eir
fam
ilies
Co
mm
un
ity
-ba
sed
ch
ild
wel
fare
an
d
pro
tect
ion
Fac
tors
in c
omm
un
itie
s th
at p
reve
nt
or
disc
oura
ge in
terv
enti
on a
re u
nde
rsto
odSt
rate
gies
are
in p
lace
to
addr
ess
fact
ors
that
pr
even
t in
terv
enti
on
Ro
le o
f ci
vil
so
ciet
y i
n s
erv
ice
del
iver
y
NG
Os'
rol
e in
fill
ing
serv
ice
gaps
is r
ecog
nis
ed
and
inco
rpor
ated
into
th
e n
atio
nal
str
ateg
y
NG
Os
enga
ged
in c
hild
pro
tect
ion
ser
vice
s ar
e re
gula
ted,
an
d ad
her
e to
gov
ern
men
t po
licy
and
stan
dard
s
NG
Os
and
gove
rnm
ent
serv
ices
are
cle
arly
de
fin
ed a
nd
do n
ot d
upl
icat
e ea
ch o
ther
Sh
ift
fro
m s
ingl
e is
sue
to c
om
pre
hen
siv
e sy
stem
s
Acc
ess
to g
ov
ern
men
t so
cia
l se
rvic
es
Com
mu
nit
ies
hav
e po
siti
ve p
erce
ptio
ns
abou
t th
e ef
fect
iven
ess
and
relia
bilit
y of
gov
ern
men
t se
rvic
es
De
liv
ery
of
soci
al
we
lfa
re a
nd
ch
ild
p
rote
ctio
n s
erv
ice
s
Fa
mil
y s
erv
ices
Shor
t te
rm m
easu
res
(pra
ctic
al, i
mm
edia
te, f
inan
cial
) ar
e co
mpl
emen
ted
by s
upp
ort
wh
ich
has
lon
ger
term
ou
tcom
es f
or p
rote
ctio
n
Com
mit
men
t to
mov
e fr
om in
divi
dual
issu
es-
base
d re
spon
se t
o h
olis
tic,
inte
grat
ed a
ppro
ach
Stru
ctu
ral r
efor
ms
tow
ards
mor
e h
olis
tic
and
inte
grat
ed a
ppro
ach
to
child
wel
fare
an
d pr
otec
tion
bet
wee
n a
nd
wit
hin
min
istr
ies
Stra
tegi
es/s
ervi
ces
are
desi
gned
to
addr
ess
the
sou
rce
of v
uln
erab
iliti
es
Pre
ven
tio
n s
erv
ices
Ch
ild w
elfa
re a
nd
prot
ecti
on is
lin
ked
to t
he
ach
ieve
men
t of
MD
Gs
Soci
al p
rote
ctio
n s
chem
es a
re c
hild
-sen
siti
ve
Aw
aren
ess
rais
ing
init
iati
ves
(to
expl
ain
new
law
s or
se
rvic
es)
are
appr
opri
atel
y im
plem
ente
d an
d co
nte
xt-
spec
ific
Qu
alit
y an
d ta
ilore
d se
rvic
es f
or f
amili
es a
re p
art
of t
he
child
pro
tect
ion
sys
tem
Ch
ild-s
ensi
tive
soc
ial p
rote
ctio
n is
har
mon
ised
at
nat
ion
al
leve
l
Ex
pec
tati
on
s o
f co
mm
un
itie
s fo
r se
rvic
esF
amili
es a
nd
com
mu
nit
ies
perc
eive
fo
rmal
sys
tem
s an
d se
rvic
es a
s:
Fai
r, e
ffec
tive
an
d ef
fici
ent
Wor
kin
g in
con
jun
ctio
n w
ith
cu
stom
ary
law
As
sim
ple
and
inex
pen
sive
to
acce
ss
Ro
le o
f co
mm
un
ity
lea
der
s
Th
e au
thor
ity
and
acti
ons
of c
omm
un
ity
lead
ers
do n
ot c
onfl
ict
wit
h r
espo
ndi
ng
to t
he
wel
fare
nee
ds o
f ch
ildre
n
Cle
ar g
uid
ance
on
wh
o de
term
ines
th
e ‘b
est
inte
rest
s’ o
f th
e ch
ild
Serv
ices
ava
ilabl
e in
urb
an a
reas
are
rep
licat
ed
or s
ubs
titu
ted
in r
ura
l are
asSe
rvic
e pr
ovid
ers
hav
e th
e re
sou
rces
to
trav
el
to r
ura
l or
rem
ote
area
sIs
olat
ed c
omm
un
itie
s ge
t al
tern
ativ
e se
rvic
es
e.g.
per
ipat
etic
/ vi
siti
ng
Th
e sa
fety
of
soci
al w
orke
rs is
not
co
mpr
omis
edSe
rvic
es a
re d
esig
ned
to
mit
igat
e cu
ltu
ral
fact
ors
& s
ocia
l nor
ms
that
det
er a
cces
s
As
prov
idin
g h
elp,
impr
ovin
g a
situ
atio
n r
ath
er c
ausi
ng
har
m
For
mal
an
d in
form
al s
tru
ctu
res
expl
ore
and
addr
ess
the
reas
ons
for
taci
t co
ndo
nin
g of
h
arm
ful p
ract
ices
an
d si
tuat
ion
s fo
r ch
ildre
n
Alt
ern
ativ
e ro
ute
s fo
r re
port
ing
and
resp
ondi
ng
to a
buse
are
kn
own
an
d ac
cess
ible
wh
en
com
mu
nit
y le
ader
s ar
e re
spon
sibl
e fo
r pe
rpet
rati
ng
viol
ence
Mec
han
ism
s fo
r re
spon
din
g to
abu
se
rath
er t
han
des
ign
atin
g in
cide
nts
as
a‘fa
mily
mat
ter’
Rel
evan
t to
th
eir
real
itie
s
As
tru
stw
orth
y (u
phol
din
g co
nfi
den
tial
ity
and
priv
acy)
Pro
vidi
ng
a w
ide
ran
ge o
f re
spon
ses
rath
er t
han
a la
st r
esor
t
60
61
6.3.2. Justice system for children
The Country Programme document is clear about the support that UNICEF has provided to strengthening the Justice System for Children. This includes supporting the development of the Juvenile Justice Bill, supporting the national Police to integrate aspects of the Bill into their training and supporting Corrections to develop Standard Operating Procedures based on the Bill.
There have been notable changes in the way that the Justice System relates to children, the most recent and significant, being the change in the age of criminal responsibility from 8 to 12 which saw the release of children from prisons. This is an important step although many further reforms are still required. While the release of children from prisons should continue to be a priority (children aged over 12 are still incarcerated in adult prisons), social services were not in place to follow up with the released children and their families to support re-integration. The repercussions of the change in the law are not yet fully observable. But from a number of high profile cases, it is clear that the justice system is struggling to know how to respond to children convicted of violent crimes. Overall, the discussions among respondents mainly focused on children in conflict with the law, and not the wider issues of how the justice system works for the protection of children. The exception was the example above where P2TP2A volunteers cited the challenges of working with the police when children are victims of a crime.
6.3.3. Data and information management
Data collection and information sharing was cited by all levels of Government respondents as well as NGOs as a significant weakness in the child protection system. This is acknowledged by UNICEF who supports the Government to improve aspects of data collection and sharing including commissioning the Violence Against Children Survey (IR 4.1.5 and IR 4.2.1) and supporting initiatives with a range of partners including the integrated Birth Registration initiative. UNICEF is supporting the Government both in the collection of this data and its use by providing or arranging training in use of data.
Different types of data and information management are not distinguished however. Broad data and information on children (e.g. in relation to poverty and education) supports effective overarching policy decisions. Narrower data (e.g. on case management and numbers of children who report child protection issues) informs specific elements of the design and delivery child and family welfare system. The overall Programme Component Result (PCR 4.2) and corresponding IRs and activities seem to focus on broad data for policy decisions, rather than narrow data for informing service delivery. The PCR itself therefore, as currently articulated in relation to data management systems and collection, is at risk of not fulfilling the remit of developing a child protection system because it is limited to one of its dual aspects.
Although PCR 4.2 mentions using monitoring and data systems for budgeting purposes, it remains challenging for Indonesia to deliver its child protection system through the decentralised governance system. Part of the reason for this is that the process of financial decentralisation takes much longer than political decentralisation.[31] As a result there is a disconnection between national policy and provincial regulations and the capability to implement by the frontline service providers.
61
62
The complex issues of financial resources need to be included in data and information management strategies. Resourcing decisions need to be based on sound evidence regarding what resources are available and where they are being channelled, as well as where the needs are most acutely felt among vulnerable children and their families. At the same time, financial resources are closely linked to human resources and capacity issues. In the context of Indonesia, both financial and human resource systems for child protection and social services require macro reforms. These will undoubtedly be complex processes because of the numbers of ministries and levels of governance involved. They will also be political because decisions to invest in child protection and social services are likely to mean that other areas of investment will be reduced.
Figure 9 below shows a proposed draft roadmap in relation to Financial Resources developed by the evaluation team.
62
63
Fig
ure
9:
Pro
po
sed
ro
ad
ma
p -
Fin
an
cia
l re
sou
rces
63
64
6.3.4. Social and behavioural change system
Finding #9
There is no evidence that the systems building approach has contributed to shifting social norms in wider society.
Important changes in shifting social norms around violence, exploitation, abuse and neglect of children have taken place amongst Government stakeholders. Due to the fact that the use of the approach is only in the early stages, there is no evidence that the systems building approach has contributed to shifting social norms in wider society. Whilst there is an understanding amongst respondents that social norms influence the protection of children, there needs to be more explicit future planning in this regard.
There are no explicit references to changing social and behavioural norms in the CPAP. However, in a narrow but significant way, this is the area of the systems building approach to child protection that seems to have gained the most traction among Government respondents. It is an encouraging result, because the ideas of prevention and holistic responses have been accepted by Government stakeholders. There seems to be a sincere willingness and readiness on the part of many to change the way that society responds to children.
There is also evidence that members of the population are taking up the state-provided limited specialised services that are available, judging by the accounts of staff in the PPT and the P2TP2A who reported that individuals and families seek them out.
UNICEF and its Government partners have implemented activities that are likely to influence ideas around social and behavioural norms, such as the systems building approach training for Government stakeholders, although an evaluation of the impact of the training has not been carried out. The training includes elements in it relating to the way children and child protection is perceived. Overall however, this is the area that seems to be least well addressed by the current systems building approach implementation plans as articulated in the CPAP and there is significant opportunity to increase this. For example the following recommendation from the Six Province Mapping could be implemented in some form:
“There is a need to develop and implement a long-term comprehensive strategy for social and behaviour change that reinforces positive values and attitudes towards children, and the enforcement of laws and practices that promote the protection of children from any harm. Schools or other learning institutions such as the ‘pesantren’ could serve as a good entry point to develop positive behaviour on child protection”[29]
Cultural perceptions of children, violence and child protection greatly influence people’s views and responses to child protection issues. Respondents across the board emphasised the recognition of cultural perceptions in the successful implementation of child protection programmes. This type of fundamental change takes considerable time and effort at an individual level for the population in general and for participants in these trainings. It was reported in all three provinces visited that there were often gaps in knowledge among key staff, even after the delivery of training. Reasons cited
64
65
included the high turnover of staff, and the fact that training participants were not necessarily key decision makers or implementers.
Key respondents in South Sulawesi highlighted the importance of behavioural change in improving child protection. There was a strong emphasis on the prevention aspects of child protection particularly through education; research to produce database on child protection, higher education involvement to provide service to family awareness on child protection, mainstreaming child protection in higher education curriculum and supporting religious leaders influence the cultural paradigms and behaviour change. This was seen to be particularly important in the South Sulawesi context in which cultural beliefs ingrain physical punishment as a key tool in educating children. There are also cultural concepts of bravery and family honour which are passed down to children, particularly boys, and which influence expectations and acceptance of some forms of violence. A survey in Sulawesi found that physical violence is the most common form of violence against children in the home (perpetrated mainly by parents, followed by siblings), the school (perpetrated mainly by peers, followed by teachers) and the community (perpetrated by peers, followed by adults.[15] As a result the local Government recognise this as a child protection issue that needs to be addressed by behavioural change initiatives.
In Aceh, issues such as domestic violence, early marriage, school dropout, child labour and violent teachers were identified as key community and Government concerns, but the standards of response varied due to cultural considerations. For example, there is a belief that child protection concerns are primarily kept secret, addressed within the family, or shared with friends, and that national and regional child protection legislation is viewed as in tension with local values, especially “Syariah or Islam values”. This highlighted the fact that not only are behavioural change initiatives required, but that local cultural contexts need to be prioritised when adapting and drafting local regulations and initiatives.
6.3.5. Legal and policy framework
Indonesia’s legal framework is large and complex. Numerous laws have been enacted related to child protection, although extensive gaps and conflictions in laws remain.[32] The most significant is Law 35/2014 on Protection of Children.25 A comprehensive overview of the national level laws, regulations and policies can be found in the latest RPJMN 2015-2019.[2]
As already mentioned, the legal and policy framework needs to perform two functions in relation to child protection systems: promote the rights of children, including to protection, and describe the delivery of prevention and response (welfare and justice) to children and families.26 There is also an
25 Replacing Law 23/2002 on Protection of Children
26 The Draft RPJMN 2015-2019 highlights the fact that Law 23/2002 does not “clearly regulate the continuous and comprehensive services for the prevention, risk reduction and treatment of abuse, violence and neglect of children”. [2. Draft RPJMN 2015-2019. 2014, BAPPENAS.] This point was raised many times during the research process with stakeholders at all levels stating that the lines of responsibility for service provision were not clear, there are limited resources and accountability mechanisms are insufficient. This echoes the findings of the provincial mapping exercise that also highlights the fact that many regulations are not translated into operational frameworks, hindering their ability to be implemented.[6. Mapping
65
66
emphasis on rehabilitation rather than prevention. This was an observation made repeatedly by respondents, particularly those involved in providing or supporting direct service provision. Staff at both the P2TP2A and PPT stated that they did not have the resources to proactively seek out and support vulnerable children.
Overall, the national legislative framework still requires comprehensive translation into sub-national regulations and policies, and those regulations in place at sub-national level do not provide an integrated, comprehensive framework for child protection. Focus tends to be based around specific child protection issues.[6]
BOX TITLE: Provincial legislation in South Sulawesi
In 2011-2012 the South Sulawesi provincial Government developed a draft of Peraturan Daerah(provincial local regulation) on Child Protection. The draft passed parliament on March 1, 2013, and officially become Peraturan Daerah 4/2013 on Child Protection System. It formalises the provincial Government’s responsibility to take a system-based approach to child protection. The scope of this regulation is for a) child and family welfare, b) support and facilitation of the juvenile justice intervention, and c) behaviour change. According to these regulations, implementation of a child protection system is supported by data and information in order to determine the form of interventions and/or policies. This is the key legislation for the child protection system in South Sulawesi.
Working directly with Government partners to refine legislation and to support it being presented in Parliament is one of UNICEF’s significant strengths. The partnership model particularly lends itself to this type of important support. UNICEF’s direct support in helping to mainstream a systems building approach to child protection into the RPJMN, supporting the reform of the Juvenile Justice Law and supporting Provincial and District level partners to interpret and adapt the laws for their context are all important examples of this.
Figure10 below shows a proposed draft roadmap in relation to the Legal and Regulatory Framework developed by the evaluation team.
Child Protection Systems. A Consolidated Report of Findings in Six Target Provinces in Indonesia: Aceh, Central Java, East Java, East Nusa Tenggara, South Sulawesi and West Sulawesi. 2012, UNICEF Indonesia.]
66
67
Fig
ure
10
: P
rop
ose
d r
oa
dm
ap
- L
ega
l a
nd
reg
ula
tory
fra
mew
ork
In p
lace
Par
tial
ly in
pla
ce
Not
yet
in p
lace
Law
s ar
ticu
late
a c
lear
req
uir
emen
t fo
r re
gist
rati
on, a
ccre
dita
tion
an
d m
onit
orin
g of
all
agen
cies
pro
vidi
ng
child
pro
tect
ion
ser
vice
s
Barriers to implementation
Pro
visi
on is
mad
e fo
r in
terv
enti
ons
aim
ed a
t st
ren
gth
enin
g pa
ren
ts’ a
bilit
y to
car
e fo
r an
d pr
otec
t th
eir
child
ren
, rat
her
th
an (
only
) re
stri
ctin
g pa
ren
tal r
igh
ts
Law
s in
clu
de s
tatu
tory
pro
visi
ons
mak
ing
it m
anda
tory
to
repo
rt a
ny
know
n o
r su
spec
ted
inci
den
ce o
f ch
ild m
altr
eatm
ent
to t
he
polic
e or
ch
ild w
elfa
re a
uth
orit
y
Foc
us
on p
reve
nti
on, e
arly
inte
rven
tion
an
d re
spon
se s
ervi
ces
Law
s ar
ticu
late
th
e pa
ren
ts r
espo
nsi
bilit
ies
and
the
Stat
e's
oblig
atio
ns
Ch
ild
Pro
tect
ion
La
w
Tra
ffic
kin
g
Lab
our
Dom
esti
c vi
olen
ce
Le
ga
l a
nd
re
gu
lato
ry f
ram
ew
ork
e.g.
In
stit
uti
onal
car
e
Cle
ar, e
nfo
rcea
ble
min
imu
m s
tan
dard
s fo
r ch
ild p
rote
ctio
n s
ervi
ces
e.g.
inte
r-ag
ency
rep
orti
ng
and
refe
rral
gu
idel
ines
or
MO
Us
Foc
us
on in
vest
igat
ive
proc
ess,
case
re
ferr
al a
nd
man
agem
ent
mec
han
ism
s an
d pr
oced
ure
s fo
r th
e re
scu
e an
d re
mov
al o
f ch
ildre
nL
aws
outl
ine
the
auth
orit
y an
d pr
oced
ure
s fo
r in
terv
enti
on b
y th
e ch
ild p
rote
ctio
n
auth
orit
y to
pre
ven
t or
res
pon
d to
ch
ildre
n a
t ri
sk
Gen
eral
law
th
at
reco
gnis
es c
hild
ren
's
righ
t to
pro
tect
ion
Des
crib
es t
he
deliv
ery
of
prev
enti
on a
nd
resp
onse
(w
elfa
re
and
just
ice)
to
child
ren
an
d fa
mili
es
Pro
hib
it a
ll fo
rms
of v
iole
nce
, abu
se a
nd
expl
oita
tion
of
child
ren
Det
aile
d pr
ovis
ion
s on
th
e au
thor
ity
for
child
pr
otec
tion
ser
vice
s an
d th
e pr
oces
s an
d pr
oced
ure
s fo
r in
terv
enin
g to
pro
tect
a
child
Law
s ar
e fr
amed
in r
igh
ts-b
ased
lan
guag
e an
d in
clu
de a
sta
tem
ent
of c
hild
ren
’s r
igh
ts
Law
s in
corp
orat
e C
RC
gu
idin
g pr
inci
ples
su
ch a
s be
st in
tere
sts
of t
he
child
, non
-di
scri
min
atio
n a
nd
child
par
tici
pati
on a
nd
resp
ect
for
thei
r vi
ews
in d
ecis
ion
mak
ing
Law
s gi
ve t
he
child
wel
fare
age
ncy
th
e re
spon
sibi
lity
to r
ecei
ve a
nd
inve
stig
ate
con
cern
s ab
out
child
ren
in n
eed
of p
rote
ctio
n a
nd
to a
pply
to
the
cou
rt f
or a
pro
tect
ion
ord
er w
her
en
eces
sary
En
forc
eabl
e re
gula
tion
or
decr
ee w
ith
cl
ear
mec
han
ism
s fo
r ac
cou
tabi
lity,
m
onit
orin
g an
d en
forc
emen
t
Imp
lem
enta
tio
n o
f la
ws
Law
s sp
ecif
y w
ho
is t
o ta
ke a
ctio
n a
nd
how
dec
isio
ns
are
to b
e m
ade,
incl
udi
ng
legi
slat
ed
proc
edu
res
for
rece
ivin
g an
d re
spon
din
g to
con
cern
s ab
out
child
ren
at
risk
or
in n
eed
of
prot
ecti
on
Cri
min
al
Co
de
Pro
tect
ion
mea
sure
s fo
r ch
ildre
n a
re c
onta
ined
in t
he
over
all c
hild
pro
tect
ion
law
rat
her
th
an s
catt
ered
acr
oss
mu
ltip
le is
sue-
spec
ific
law
s, p
olic
ies
and
nat
ion
al p
lan
s of
act
ion
Aw
aren
ess
of la
ws
App
ropr
iate
hu
man
res
ourc
es
App
ropr
iate
fin
anci
al r
esou
rces
Th
e la
ws
are
asse
ssed
to
be r
ealis
tic
and
appr
opri
ate
in t
he
nat
ion
al
con
text
an
d cu
ltu
re
Law
s in
clu
de c
lear
, sta
nda
rdis
ed p
roce
dure
s fo
r a
child
’s p
rogr
ess
thro
ugh
th
e ch
ild
prot
ecti
on s
yste
m a
nd
deta
iled
guid
ance
on
th
e cr
iter
ia, p
roce
dure
s an
d m
inim
um
st
anda
rds
for
loca
tin
g, a
sses
smen
t, r
efer
ral,
care
pla
nn
ing,
mon
itor
ing
and
reco
rd
keep
ing
67
68
6.4. Capacity of child protection duty bearers
Finding #10
There was little evidence regarding the extent to which capacity of duty bearers has been improved, with measurement impaired as there was no baseline data on capacity.
What is challenging in responding to the evaluation question, which asked to what extent the capacity of duty bearers has been improved, is the lack of baseline and monitoring data on the capacity of Child Protection duty bearers. The evaluation did find capacity among some of the respondents: i.e. individuals who showed confidence and leadership in child protection issues.
To date it appears that discussions about the systems building approach have increased awareness of the idea of and terminology used around child protection. In practice capacity building of Government stakeholders has logically been focussed where there are pilots and activities taking place. The majority of Government respondents in this evaluation were experiencing the ‘lag’ between the national or sub-national shifts in legislation and the scaling up of direct services as already mentioned. In reality, there is not much of a role for most of them at this time because the services and initiatives are not in place yet.
In this regard expectations among respondents could to be managed more effectively so they understand where they (i.e. their district or department) are in terms of processes happening. More information about the pilots and initiatives that are happening elsewhere is also likely to serve the purpose of increasing the learning and expertise of this cadre of stakeholders over time.
Figure 11 below shows a proposed draft roadmap in relation to Human Resources and Capacity developed by the evaluation team.
68
69
Fig
ure
11:
Pro
po
sed
ro
ad
ma
p -
Hu
ma
n c
ap
aci
ty a
nd
res
ou
rces
In p
lace
Par
tial
ly in
pla
ce
Not
yet
in p
lace
Vol
un
teer
s pr
ovid
e qu
alit
y,
focu
ssed
ass
ista
nce
an
d ar
e n
ot
over
stre
tch
ed
Th
e ro
les
of o
ther
min
istr
ies
and
sect
ors
in t
he
syst
em a
re
reco
gnis
ed
Tra
inin
g is
pro
vide
d fo
r te
ach
ers,
po
lice
and
hea
lth
car
e w
orke
rsSt
aff
in r
ura
l are
as a
re a
dequ
atel
y tr
ain
ed, s
upp
orte
d an
d su
perv
ised
Tec
hn
ical
off
icia
ls w
ho
hav
e a
role
in
impl
emen
tin
g th
e la
ws
hav
e an
u
nde
rsta
ndi
ng
of c
hild
pro
tect
ion
an
d ch
ild p
rote
ctio
n le
gisl
atio
n
Th
e go
vern
men
t tr
acks
wh
o h
as
rece
ived
tra
inin
g
Cu
rric
ulu
ms
for
trai
nin
g so
cial
w
orke
rs a
re t
ailo
red
and
appl
icab
le
to I
ndo
nes
ia’s
div
erse
con
text
s
Ext
ern
al d
onor
fu
nde
d in
itia
tive
s al
ign
wit
h n
atio
nal
gov
ern
men
t re
sou
rce
and
capa
city
nee
ds
Rol
e of
pro
fess
ion
al s
ocia
l wor
kers
on
ce t
hey
are
tra
ined
is c
lear
Th
e ro
le o
f so
cial
wor
kers
an
d th
eir
appr
oach
es t
o w
orki
ng
wit
h
fam
ilies
an
d co
mm
un
itie
s ar
e ac
cept
able
(to
th
e co
mm
un
itie
s)
Pro
fess
ion
ali
sati
on
of
soci
al
wo
rk
Pro
fess
ion
al s
ocia
l wor
k as
soci
atio
ns
are
esta
blis
hed
an
d ac
cred
it u
niv
ersi
ty c
ours
es a
s ap
prop
riat
e
Th
e ro
les
and
expe
ctat
ion
s of
vo
lun
teer
an
d co
mm
un
ity
hu
man
re
sou
rces
are
cle
arly
def
ined
App
ropr
iate
leve
ls o
f re
sou
rces
are
ag
reed
an
d al
loca
ted
to s
upp
orti
ng
volu
nte
ers
and
com
mu
nit
y h
um
anre
sou
rces
Stra
tegi
es o
f so
cial
wor
kers
an
d ot
her
pro
fess
ion
al c
adre
s h
ave
the
reso
urc
e al
loca
tion
to
mee
t th
e ca
paci
ty n
eeds
of
the
child
an
d fa
mily
wel
fare
sys
tem
Th
ere
are
spec
ialis
ed s
choo
ls o
f so
cial
wor
k an
d co
mm
un
ity
deve
lopm
ent
Un
iver
siti
es p
rovi
de e
duca
tion
to
mee
t th
e n
eeds
of
the
nat
ion
al
visi
on
Ca
pa
city
of
vo
lun
teer
s, c
ivil
so
ciet
y,
& c
om
mu
nit
ies
Soci
al w
ork
is p
erce
ived
in a
br
oade
r co
nte
xt o
f pr
ofes
sion
alis
m
Tra
inin
g fo
r vo
lun
teer
an
d co
mm
un
ity
stru
ctu
res
incl
ude
s a
bala
nce
of
rais
ing
awar
enes
s of
ri
ghts
an
d la
ws,
an
d pr
ovid
ing
dire
ct a
ssis
tan
ce
Ch
ild p
rote
ctio
n t
rain
ing
for
prof
essi
onal
s in
oth
er s
ecto
rs is
pa
rt o
f on
goin
g pr
ofes
sion
al
deve
lopm
ent
Suff
icie
nt
to im
plem
ent
and
deliv
er t
he
serv
ices
in t
he
child
pro
tect
ion
sys
tem
st
rate
gy
Loc
al le
vel s
ocia
l act
ors
wh
o h
ave
a ge
ner
ic s
ocia
l wel
fare
rol
e w
ork
wit
h s
taff
wh
o sp
ecia
lise
in c
hild
pr
otec
tion
Geo
grap
hic
dis
trib
uti
on o
f so
cial
w
elfa
re s
taff
is e
ven
an
d/or
on
th
e ba
sis
of n
eed
Stra
tegi
es a
ddre
ss b
ias
tow
ards
so
cial
wel
fare
in u
rban
cen
tres
Act
ual
nu
mbe
r of
cas
es t
hat
ch
ild
prot
ecti
on s
taff
han
dle
per
year
is
mon
itor
ed t
o de
term
ine
staf
fin
g n
eeds
Suff
icie
nt
to m
eet
the
nee
ds
of t
he
popu
lati
on i.
e. r
atio
s of
sta
ff t
o po
pula
tion
is
adeq
uat
e
Hu
ma
n r
eso
urc
e ca
pa
city
an
d
tra
inin
gG
eogr
ap
hic
dis
trib
uti
on
Ca
pa
city
of
hea
lth
, ed
uca
tio
n
an
d l
ega
l p
rofe
ssio
na
ls
Hu
ma
n R
eso
urc
es
an
d C
ap
aci
ty
Acc
ura
te c
alcu
lati
on c
an b
e m
ade
of t
he
hu
man
res
ourc
es a
vaila
ble
to t
he
syst
em
Th
ere
are
suff
icie
nt
nu
mbe
rs o
f pr
ofes
sion
ally
tra
ined
soc
ial
wel
fare
sta
ff
Wit
hin
th
e ju
stic
e se
ctor
pr
ofes
sion
als
are
trai
ned
:T
rain
ing
is in
corp
orat
ed in
to t
he
polic
e ac
adem
y tr
ain
ing
Pol
ice
are
trai
ned
in c
hild
an
d ge
nde
r-se
nsi
tive
inve
stig
ativ
e an
d re
ferr
al p
roce
dure
s fo
r po
lice
spec
ialis
ts
Tra
inin
g fo
r pr
ofes
sion
als
is
inco
rpor
ated
into
cu
rric
ula
of
acad
emic
an
d vo
cati
onal
tra
inin
g
Impa
cts
of f
requ
ent
rota
tion
of
soci
al w
elfa
re s
taff
is m
itig
ated
Pu
blic
sec
tor
post
s an
d sa
lari
es a
re
prot
ecte
d in
th
e co
nte
xt o
f po
st-
fin
anci
al c
risi
s au
ster
ity
to e
nsu
re
the
qual
ity
of s
ocia
l ser
vice
s
Fre
quen
t ro
tati
on o
f pe
rson
nel
is
mit
igat
ed
69
70
6.5. Structures and mandates
Finding #11
The systems building approach to child protection is broadly considered as relevant but is limited by the lack of clarity about roles and responsibilities for the overall development of a child protection system.
The CPAP does not articulate how it supports the defining of structures and mandates for child protection. There is an inherent assumption that structures and mandates are already determined, or will be determined through the implementation of national and provincial level legislation. However, as already discussed, the legislation lacks directives on the delivery of services.
From the interviews and focus groups, it was clear that the idea of building or supporting a system for protecting children resonated with respondents, particularly if it involved working within the existing bureaucracy. Where the expansion of the system would require extending the responsibility of that bureaucracy or formally involving new partners, there was an apparent lack of confidence about how to develop the system, especially given the stated limitations of budget and human resource capacity. However, the fact that the concept of a system resonated with respondents provides an important opportunity to capitalise upon.
The evaluation found no single unified understanding of ‘child’, ‘child protection’ or ‘child protection system’ among respondents. The Indonesian Government’s interpretation of child protection is found in the national child protection legislation, Law 35/2014 on Protection of Children (amended from Law 23/2002) [33] that is based on Indonesia’s obligations upon ratification of the Convention on the Rights of the Child in 1990.[34] This being the case the legislation generally describes a child’s rightto be protected from harm rather than the actual measures that will be taken or services provided to actually protect them from harm. This is an important difference because, as a result, the responsibility for implementing child protection measures is not defined. This legal ambiguity is highlighted as a significant limitation in the opinion of respondents, particularly civil society stakeholders, because it impacts on the ability to design a coherent system of services and support.
No single Ministry has the lead oversight for child protection in Indonesia.[30] Whilst BAPPENAS includes child protection responsibilities in the national planning document (RPJMN), it is primarily the Ministry for Women’s Empowerment and Child Protection which has responsibility for coordination and the Ministry of Social Welfare which has responsibility for implementing social welfare services and assistance. As a cross-sectoral issue, there are many other Ministries that have responsibility for aspects of child protection, including many of UNICEFs’ major partners, as listed in its Country Programme Summary Results Matrix. These other agencies include the Ministry of Health, Ministry of Education, Ministry of Justice, the Supreme Court, and the National Disaster Management Body.[35]
It is intended that this section be only a summary of the paths of responsibility for child protection in Indonesia. This summary is provided for context and to illustrate how the large number of respondents involved in child protection creates a situation where many different opinions and perspectives abound. Different agencies and individuals understand the systems building approach in their own unique way and judge the relevance of the systems building approach according to their
70
71
own mandates and roles. A comprehensive mapping of the child protection systems in UNICEF’s target provinces demonstrates how this plays out in reality.[6]
Figure 12 below shows a proposed draft roadmap in relation to Structure and Mandates developed by the evaluation team.
71
72
Fig
ure
12
: P
rop
ose
d r
oa
dm
ap
- S
tru
ctu
res
an
d m
an
da
tes
In p
lace
Par
tial
ly in
pla
ce
Not
yet
in p
lace
Min
imu
m s
tan
dard
s fo
r re
side
nti
al c
are
faci
litie
sR
obu
st m
ech
anis
ms
for
mon
itor
ing
and
enfo
rcem
ent
of s
tan
dard
s
Tra
dit
ion
al
or
info
rma
l co
mm
un
ity
le
ad
ers
Wel
l-de
fin
ed r
oles
for
en
suri
ng
the
wel
l-be
ing
of f
amili
es a
nd
child
ren
in t
hei
r co
mm
un
ity
Au
thor
ity
is r
ecog
nis
ed b
y th
e C
onst
itu
tion
or
by a
dec
ree
Rol
e of
com
mu
nit
y le
ader
s is
har
nes
sed
by t
he
form
al s
yste
m
Ter
tiar
y se
rvic
es a
re e
stab
lish
ed f
or im
med
iate
, cr
isis
-bas
ed in
terv
enti
ons
Ade
quat
e sc
ope
to s
upp
ort
child
ren
an
d fa
mili
es p
ost
cris
is e
.g. a
fter
bei
ng
disc
har
ged
from
hos
pita
l
Spec
ialis
ed s
tru
ctu
res
are
appr
opri
ate
for
both
gi
rls
and
boys
Aca
dem
ic a
nd
voca
tion
al t
rain
ing
inst
itu
tes
are
key
part
ner
s in
th
e pr
ofes
sion
alis
atio
n o
f so
cial
w
ork
and
child
pro
tect
ion
exp
erti
seD
edic
ated
ch
ildre
n's
cou
rts
Ch
ild-s
ensi
tive
cou
rt e
nvi
ron
men
ts (
scre
ens
and
vide
o eq
uip
men
t)G
over
nm
ent-
run
res
iden
tial
car
e fa
cilit
ies
for
child
ren
in n
eed
of
prot
ecti
on
Loc
al s
tru
ctu
res
wh
ich
pro
mot
e aw
aren
ess
and
serv
ices
hav
e gu
idel
ines
on
ada
ptin
g ap
proa
ches
to
loca
l con
text
s
Loc
al le
vel a
gen
cies
res
pon
sibl
e fo
r ch
ild w
elfa
re s
ervi
ces
hav
e m
anda
te a
nd
auth
orit
y to
rec
eive
rep
orts
or
take
act
ion
re
gard
ing
child
ren
an
d fa
mili
es a
t ri
sk
Ope
rati
onal
pro
cedu
res
(su
b-di
stri
ct, v
illag
e le
vel)
art
icu
late
how
to
impl
emen
t th
e pr
ovin
cial
/ di
stri
ct le
vel l
egis
lati
on
Ch
ild p
rote
ctio
n is
con
side
red
a se
ctor
rat
her
th
an s
olel
y a
mat
ter
of in
ter-
agen
cy r
efer
ral a
nd
coor
din
atio
n
Soci
al s
ervi
ces
coor
din
atio
n c
entr
es (
foca
l poi
nts
for
rep
orti
ng
and
refe
rral
)So
cial
Wel
fare
Ser
vice
Cen
tres
(P
usp
elke
ssos
) pi
lots
at
sub-
dist
rict
leve
l foc
al p
oin
ts
Hos
pita
l-ba
sed
one-
stop
cri
sis
cen
tres
off
erin
g co
ordi
nat
ed
med
ical
, leg
al a
nd
cou
nse
llin
g se
rvic
es f
or c
hild
ren
an
d ad
ult
s af
fect
ed b
y vi
olen
ce
Spec
ialis
ed p
olic
e u
nit
s fo
r ch
ild v
icti
ms
of c
rim
es
Spec
ialis
ed p
olic
e u
nit
s fo
r ch
ild a
llege
d of
fen
ders
Coh
esiv
e an
d co
ordi
nat
ed m
anag
emen
t be
twee
n m
inis
trie
s w
ith
res
pon
sibi
litie
s fo
r ch
ild w
elfa
re a
nd
prot
ecti
on
Cle
ar r
espo
nsi
bilit
y fo
r al
loca
tion
of
budg
ets
Info
rmal
str
uct
ure
s ar
e in
pla
ce
Coh
esiv
e an
d co
ordi
nat
ed
man
agem
ent
betw
een
pol
icy
and
serv
ice
deliv
ery
Cle
ar
resp
onsi
bilt
y fo
r di
rect
ser
vice
de
liver
y
Cle
ar
resp
onsi
bilit
y fo
r po
licy
deve
lopm
ent,
co
ordi
nat
ion
an
dst
ate
man
agem
ent
Coh
esiv
e an
d co
ordi
nat
ed m
anag
emen
t be
twee
n m
inis
trie
s w
ith
res
pon
sibi
litie
s fo
r ch
ild w
elfa
re a
nd
prot
ecti
on (
them
atic
da
taba
ses,
gu
idan
ce a
nd
proc
edu
res,
an
d se
rvic
es a
t n
atio
nal
leve
l are
coo
rdin
ated
)
Na
tio
na
l co
ord
ina
tin
g co
mm
itte
e o
r m
ech
an
ism
Pre
cise
rol
e an
d fu
nct
ion
s of
com
mit
tees
are
cl
ear
Coo
rdin
atio
n b
etw
een
sec
tors
is e
ffec
tive
Lea
d a
gen
cy w
ith
pri
ma
ry r
esp
on
sib
ilit
y
for
chil
d w
elfa
re a
nd
pro
tect
ion
Man
date
s an
d ro
les
of m
ult
iple
ded
icat
ed
agen
cies
are
cle
ar
Str
uct
ure
s a
nd
ma
nd
ate
s
Cen
tra
l le
vel
Su
b-n
ati
on
al
lev
els
For
mal
str
uct
ure
s ar
e in
pla
ce
Su
b-n
ati
on
al
coo
rdin
ati
ng
com
mit
tee
or
mec
ha
nis
ms
Pre
cise
rol
e an
d fu
nct
ion
s of
com
mit
tees
are
cl
ear
Coo
rdin
atio
n b
etw
een
sec
tors
is e
ffec
tive
Lo
cal
lev
el s
tru
ctu
res
For
mal
str
uct
ure
s an
d se
rvic
es a
t lo
cal l
evel
rel
ate
to e
xist
ing
info
rnal
str
uct
ure
s in
com
mu
nit
ies
Com
mu
nit
y le
vel c
hild
pro
tect
ion
com
mit
tees
or
net
wor
ks h
ave
been
est
ablis
hed
to
addr
ess
the
lack
of
form
al c
hild
wel
fare
se
rvic
es a
t lo
cal l
evel
s
Mec
han
ism
s an
d pr
oces
ses
for
repo
rtin
g ch
ild p
rote
ctio
n
inci
den
ts a
re s
tren
gth
ened
an
d co
mm
un
ity
mem
bers
, in
clu
din
g ch
ildre
n, k
now
how
to
use
th
em
Ch
alle
nge
s w
ith
su
stai
nab
ility
an
d re
sou
rces
of
com
mu
nit
y-ba
sed
mec
han
ism
s ar
e u
nde
rsto
od a
nd
addr
esse
d
Sp
ecia
lise
d s
tru
ctu
res
an
d i
nst
itu
tio
ns
72
73
7.Efficiency
7.1.Defining efficiency
The international definition states that: ‘Efficiency measures the outputs – qualitative and quantitative – in relation to the inputs. It is an economic term which signifies that the aid uses the least costly resources possible in order to achieve the desired results.’[20]
In practice, data was not available to undertake an economic analysis on cost-efficiency or a full Value for Money analysis, and the process focussed on qualitative analysis of the evaluation questions around efficiency.
7.2. Cost-efficiency of resources and expenditure
Finding #12
All of the five elements of The National Child Protection System Conceptual Framework are apparent to varying degrees in the UNICEF’s 2011-2015 Country Programme.
The limitations of time prevented sufficient analysis of the efficiency of the use of resources. The current CPAP does not elaborate the links between the Activities and the Results (Outcomes), but all of the five elements of The National Child Protection System Conceptual Framework are apparent to varying degrees in the UNICEF’s 2011-2015 Country Programme.
The UNICEF Country Programme provided budget and expenditure information on the activities and components within the Results Framework. The Government provided some but not comprehensive expenditure information or budget allocation data. A cost effectiveness analysis requires a comparison of the costs of an intervention with another intervention that has the same results. Without any baseline or comparison data, a cost effectiveness assessment is not currently possible.
UNICEF’s modus operandi is to provide support to its national and provincial level partners to implement their activities and to achieve their outcomes. It is important to take into consideration that this type of advisory support role can make it difficult to prove attribution, or even contribution to the stated outcomes as UNICEF is an ‘influencer’ rather than an ‘implementer’. This being the case, this section focuses primarily on the sphere in which UNICEF has the most influence, namely at the level of Activity.
All of the elements of the National Child Protection System Conceptual Framework as defined above are apparent in UNICEF’s 2011-2015 Country Programme. The majority of UNICEF’s activities directly and indirectly support the development and refinement of the legal and policy aspects of the system and to a lesser extent, the data and information aspects. These are all high level activities. This is consistent with what can be expected from a working model that is based on partnerships with high level Government.
These activities support the three stated components of the child protection system and in some cases child protection as a whole as illustrated in the following table (Figure 13).
73
74
Component Activity
Child protection system general
Support at least 4 provinces to draft a Child Protection PERDA
Support the adoption of the revised recommendations for improving birth registration at national and sub-national level
Support 6 provinces to carry out Child Protection Systems Mapping
Support Government to draft Standards of Service
Support MOSA and MOWECP to prepare for and conduct the VACS
Support Government to train 75% of relevant staff to collect, compile, analyse and utilize child protection data for planning, policy development and budgeting
Support MOSA to train Child Protection in Emergency Rapid Response Team at National Level
Social and behavioural change system
NOTE: there are no activities or outcomes that explicitly address the social and behavioural change system, but it can be argued that a number of them contain elements of this including:
Support the adoption of the revised recommendations for improving birth registration at national and sub-national level
Support MOSA and MOWECP to prepare for and conduct the VACS
Support Government to train 75% of relevant staff to collect, compile, analyse and utilize child protection data for planning, policy development and budgeting
Social welfare system for children and families
Support the Government to develop a Plan of Action to strengthen the child protection system into child and family welfare services
Justice for children system Support the development of the Juvenile Justice Bill to the point that the Bill is before parliament
Support national Police to integrate justice for children into training models in accordance with the new Juvenile Justice Bill
Support Corrections to develop Standard Operative Procedures on Justice for Children
Figure 13: Summary of activities and components in the UNICEF CPAP
The evaluation research identified some other important activities that are/have been conducted or supported by UNICEF that contribute to strengthening the child protection system using a systems building approach that are not directly reflected in the Country Plan documents, but are important to include. For example:
74
75
Developing Child Protection and Social Work in Indonesia Area Based Pilot Projects
Child Friendly Pesantren
Support to the PKSA, including commissioning a review
Support to the improved birth registration initiatives
It is important to note, as mentioned in other parts of this report, that there is insufficient data available to undertake an analysis of the efficiency of the use of resources in a timely manner due to the current Country Programme not elaborating the assumptions underpinning the plan or demonstrating pathways that link the Activities to the Results (Outcomes). Despite the fact that the Mid Term Review states that most of the Intermediate Results and Programme Component Results have been achieved or are on target, the results are disconnected from the activities making it is extremely difficult to discuss attribution or contribution by UNICEF to their completion (dependent on Government partner actions). UNICEF should consider reviewing this for future monitoring and evaluation strategies to be able to assess these important criteria.
7.3. Partnerships and coordination
Finding #13
UNICEF has developed some highly collaborative relationships with key Government partners, particularly BAPPENAS, MOSA and MOWECP.
UNICEF has succeeded in developing a highly collaborative relationship with BAPPENAS which is an important and strategic partnership. While other ministries are mentioned as key partners in the country programme documents, their engagement as defined as meaningful was difficult to assess.
In general, national level NGO partners acknowledged that UNICEF’s contribution to and influence upon child protection issues in Indonesia was important, particularly due to its high profile and brand recognition. Essentially, though they reported feeling excluded from dialogue, and attributed this to UNICEF’s focus on national level partners i.e. Government.
Finding #14
Multi-sector engagement certainly seems to take place through the Pokja, but respondents at all levels stated that this could be strengthened further, particularly at sub-national level.
Multi-sector engagement certainly seems to take place through the Pokja (National Child Protection Working Group). There are also ongoing relationships with child focussed NGOs including coordination of activities and sharing of learning, in particular in relation to field based pilot projects. However, according to respondents at all levels, there were no effective coordination mechanisms, meaning that there may have been forums and joint meetings, but there was frustration that action did not seem achievable from these.
Some of the reasons seem to be a range of practical considerations that governments and organisations the world over would recognise: the difficulties in making time to coordinate, the
75
76
pressures of other priorities etc. However, in Indonesia’s context there is a further barrier, in that “coordination” among Government respondents seems to generally refer to exchanging of information rather than the strategic organisation of activities towards a common goal.27
Part of the reason such strategic organisation of activities did not take place, according to civil servant respondents was that they did not know exactly what they were supposed to be coordinating, or in fact there were no (or few) activities (i.e. services) to coordinate. The civil service seems to consist largely of individuals in administration roles, rather than service delivery roles. Examples of service delivery roles in a child protection context would likely include social workers, but these roles are still largely considered non-professional volunteer roles at community level.
The current decentralisation mechanism means that budgeting lines are not straightforward and respondents in all provinces at all levels complained about there being insufficient funding.
What is probably the most challenging in the Indonesian context is the tendency of administrative responses to rely on the legislature as the sole mechanism for response (rather than actions and service provision) and at the same time find actions and service provision constrained by legislation.
It is important to note that the application of the systems building approach to the protection of children is still at a nascent stage. As a result, the current structure and functioning of this child protection system cannot be attributed directly to the adoption of a systems lens. However, understanding how the system has changed (as documented in the 2012 provincial mappings) in recent years is essential for understand the contribution of the approach to developing the current child protection system.[6] This provides the basis for analysing the evolution of the system and for developing strategic plans to strengthen the system in the future.
Any system has to be based upon a set of common objectives and expectations if it is to function effectively. In terms of developing a child protection system, it is essential that all stakeholders with responsibilities to children consider the system as a relevant and important vehicle for achieving welfare and protection aims. Where parties accord different levels of relevance to the system, there is likely to be a lack of harmony in approach.
This fact is especially important in Indonesia where so many ministries are designated a role to play in protecting children. The following Ministries and their associated provincial and district departments are mandated for child protection:
Ministry of Women’s Empowerment and Child Protection: Coordination
Ministry of Social Affairs: Delivery of social welfare services
Ministry of Planning (BAPPENAS): Policy development and advocacy
27 The term ‘coordination’ correctly translates into ‘koordinasi’ in Indonesian, but the meaning is not necessarily exactly the same. Care should be taken to test such basic assumptions.
76
77
Ministry of Human Rights and Law: Legal framework
KPAI (Indonesian Child Protection Commission): Receiving complaints related to Child Protection
Agreement on which is the lead agency for child protection varies in three sample provinces visited during this evaluation. In Aceh, for example, Bappeda is the leading agency for coordination but implementation is undertaken by the Office of Social Welfare, and Office of Women’s Empowerment and Child Protection focuses on public awareness raising and the ‘Child Friendly City’ movement.
In South Sulawesi, the key child protection stakeholders are the Badan PP (Office of Women Empowerment and Child Protection) in the provincial and district level, Dinas Sosial (Social Welfare Office) at the provincial level, Bappeda, Police Department, P2TP2A28, and LPA Sulawesi Selatan (Lembaga Perlindungan Anak: Child Protection Agency of South Sulawesi). Confusion arises, about how these stakeholders coordinate and operate together partially because of weaknesses in the legal and policy framework around the implementation of regulations. For example:
Lack of operational procedures at the sub-district and village level to implement the provincial and/or district level legislation
Limited funding for child protection (e.g. inadequate financial and human resources for P2TP2A to fulfil its purpose [32])
Reportedly different perceptions and understandings regarding child protection between provincial, district and national level stakeholders
When the perceptions of respondents are so varied, the opportunity for applying the same systems lens is minimal, resulting in a wide range of different approaches to tackling child protection. This inevitably has resulted in fragmented policies, and the absence of a specific provincial level regulation on child protection. Stakeholders reported that many of these issues have resulted in limited services for children, and services that are available are not integrated, not comprehensive, and low in quality.
A system for protecting children requires clarity about the inter-linking roles and mandates of different agencies: otherwise there is no possibility of ensuring solid coordination among agencies. A systems building approach requires a common vision and meaningful cooperation. It requires more than the strategy currently used by Government agencies namely to establish a working group both at national and sub-national levels. Such an inter-ministry working group, in the context of the systems building approach, faces the challenge of transitioning from the former single issue-based child protection approaches, as well as navigating the fragmented regulations and policies arising from the lack of a clear designation of authority for child protection services at provincial and district levels.
28 Operated by the Ministry of Women's Empowerment and Child Protection
77
78
The lack of clarity around responsibilities and permissions between provincial and district level entities, and between ministries, is matched by the complexity of the budgetary system and rules. This was frequently cited by Government respondents who experienced the specificity of legislation as restricting rather than facilitating activities.29 Regardless of how real or perceived this situation in regard to flexibility in programming is, it is clearly a significant barrier, and indicates that the legislative environment needs to be assessed in the context of financial accounting and decision making.
The respondents in this evaluation were largely from the ministries of BAPPENAS, Social Services and Women’s Empowerment and Child Protection. The Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of Administrative and Bureaucratic Reform would seem like key strategic partners to implement the systems building approach as well.
29 The situation is reinforced by the auditing requirements, which ensure that funds are only spent on approved activities allocated under the correct nomenclatures. To deviate from pre-determined permissions risks being held accountable for fraud. It is not clear whether this is a real or perceived risk.
78
79
8. Equity
8.1.Defining equity
The equity agenda of UNICEF has already been discussed in the section on Relevance above. This section refers to evidence of elements of UNICEF’s equity agenda. According to UNICEF, “equity means that all children have an opportunity to survive, develop and reach their full potential, without discrimination, bias or favouritism’’.[23]
8.2. Effect on the most vulnerable children and families
Finding #15
UNICEF’s equity agenda is yet to be realised through the systems building approach to child protection in Indonesia.
Using a systems building approach to child protection provides an opportunity to build an equity agenda from the early stages of developing the child protection system. There are examples of where equity is considered within specific elements, such as training modules on the vulnerabilities of children. However an analysis across the wider design of the system does not seem to be taking place on an ongoing basis i.e. the principle of equity is seemingly absent from the design as well as the delivery of the system. Outreach and prevention of violence among vulnerable and disadvantaged children and families is not yet taking place most service providers. As already discussed, the approach to building the child protection system in Indonesia requires services and responses to be in place, and the level of sophistication in targeting children based on a range of vulnerabilities is still to be seen.
Among provincial and district government respondents who participated in the survey as part of this evaluation, approximately half thought that there was an increase in reaching the most vulnerable, with over 20% of district level respondents believing the increased focus was significant (figure 17 in Annex 6). In practice, however, some services are available exclusively to those who can be proactive in finding out information about the services (i.e. through the internet), have the confidence and agency to self-refer (including to physically navigate potentially formidable government buildings) and the financial means to reach the services.
Gender inequality and reaching the most vulnerable
Finding #16
Evidence for addressing gender inequalities and the empowerment of women and girls did not emerge strongly in the evaluation.
The Evaluation Team explicitly consulted respondents on whether there is any evidence of the systems building approach addressing gender inequalities and the empowerment of women and girls. In short the response that their approach to building a child protection system was not addressing
79
80
gender inequalities, and issues such as non-disaggregated data was a hindrance. Essentially gender inequality was not part of their thinking in the design and implementation of policies and activities.
While equity, gender and the most vulnerable are not explicitly dealt with in the Country Programme document, there is evidence that some of UNICEF’s activities take them into consideration. PCR 4.1 makes specific reference to “all vulnerable children”, but there is nowhere in the lower levels of the plan that explicitly addresses it and therefore it is difficult to see how this can be achieved as a PCR.
UNICEF has cross-cutting policies that refer to gender, equity and vulnerability. There is an opportunity in the future to strengthen the focus of this, particularly in light of UNICEF’s equity policy, by making it an explicit short term outcome with a relevant series of activities during the next planning phase.
Violence against children and child protection has gender dimensions and therefore applying a systems building approach requires particular consideration to elements of the system that address the particular needs and vulnerabilities of both girls and boys. The release of the Violence Against Children Survey was expected to provide detailed data on this matter. Although core indicators were published in 2014, the full results of the survey will not be published due to the poor quality of the data.30 Through the evidence seen as part of this evaluation, in documentation and in interviews with Government respondents, there was very little mention of whether or not the systems building approach has applied a gender lens or a discrimination lens. Examples of issues that affect girls and boys differently include early marriage by which girls are disproportionately affected in numbers and impact.[6]
One of the key ways in which the gendered aspects of violence and child protection are addressed in Indonesia is through the fact that one of the key ministries tasked with child protection responsibilities is the Ministry of Women’s Empowerment and Child Protection. This provides an opportunity to address the specific aspects of child protection that may affect women (i.e. with children). However, a comprehensive gender-sensitive approach would need to consider the issues that affect both girls and boys differently. Service delivery also often has a gendered element for example the P2TP2A (Integrated Service Centres for Women and Children) focus on women as key clients with specific needs. An observation from the research is that data, when collected is often not gender disaggregated and boys and girls are often categorised together under the heading ‘children’.
One of the key ways in which the Government is attempting to target especially vulnerable children is through the Social Welfare Program for Children (PKSA). The cash transfer element of this programme in particular gives the opportunity for direct interaction between Government service providers and vulnerable families.
30 Core indicators from the national Violence Against Children Survey have been published which show that boys are more affected than girls by emotional and physical violence and sexual abuse. The core indicators were published on 05 September 2014 in the newspaper Koran Tempo.
80
81
9.Sustainability
9.1.Defining sustainability
The international definition states that: ‘Sustainability is concerned with measuring whether the benefits of an activity are likely to continue after donor funding has been withdrawn’.[20] Particularly for a middle-income country like Indonesia, this can imply policy influencing/advocacy and modelling/piloting roles for agencies such as UNICEF.
In the socio-political context of Indonesia, the Government assumes a high level of ownership over national policies, planning and interventions. The context of decentralisation creates several sub-national layers with varying degrees of autonomy (legislation, policy, budget allocation, expenditure) which adds complexity to UNICEF’s upstream work focus. Whereas previously policies at national level had a clear trajectory for influencing decisions through a hierarchy, that chain is now disrupted and may require UNICEF to redefine upstream to include provincial and other levels of governance.
9.2. Enabling and constraining factors for replication and sustainability
Finding # 17
There are some strong enabling factors for replication and sustainability, notably the increasing importance of child protection in the RPJMN, and although there are also constraints, these constraints are being or can be addressed.
As the implementation of this approach is still in the early years, there is work being done and there are significant opportunities for undertaking the ground work to support sustainability, particularly in regards to supporting the development and adaption of legislation, designing, testing and disseminating implementation models and supporting long term behavioural change initiatives.
The main enabling factors:
Child protection in general and a systems building approach to child protection has been given increasing importance in the RPJMN. The fundamental importance of this document in guiding the actions of Government at all levels cannot be underestimated. It is one of the most important enabling factors and supporting it should remain of the highest priorities
General acceptance by key respondents that a systems building approach to child protection is an appropriate approach, even if there is still some work to be done to create a unified understanding
Ongoing strengthening and development of key legislation, regulations and guidelines. There is an appetite for legislative reform and UNICEF has been successful in carefully supporting their partners in doing this
81
82
The main constraints influencing replication and sustainability are:
Lack of documented strategic plan for implementing a systems building approach both within UNICEF and with Government stakeholders. The RPJMN does not fulfil this role as it is a manifestation of the approach rather than the plan for the approach
Lack of replicable models that can be adapted at sub-regional level (this is being actively addressed in part by the Child Protection and Social Work Area Based Pilot Protects.)
Understanding of roles, responsibilities and resource allocation at sub-district level is still developing. This is being supported by UNICEF in key sites and needs to continue. When enough work has been done in this area, the lessons from this should be packaged and disseminated for adaption in other areas
There are diverse and widespread cultural attitudes, beliefs and behaviours that are not conducive to protecting children. Changing these sorts of norms is a major and long term (possibly multi-generational) undertaking. This was mentioned by respondents, but was not currently being strategically addressed
There are some funding and institutional capacity restrictions at all levels
Some other perceived and actual barriers as stated by respondents include:
Lack of awareness of social and child protection service provision in general
Lack of awareness of the pilot and example programs that are taking place
Confusion as to responsibility and ownership among Government departments, as well as territorialism
Perception of social work as voluntary and charity rather than profession requiring expertise
Arguably, there is little that could be replicated at national level. The unit of response and systems needs to be considered at community, sub-district, district and provincial levels.
82
83
9.3. Replicable operational models
Finding #18
The early stages of implementing this approach mean that there are not many models/pilots in place, and the ones that are in place are not well known among respondents. There is an appetite amongst stakeholders for this level of detail of information and support to replicate good practice.
The extent to which models for the systems building approach in Indonesia have been established are limited, mainly due to the fact that the approach is still in its early stages, and UNICEF itself has a very limited budget compared with the scale of Indonesia. Most of UNICEF’s support has focussed on research and training, with replicable lessons from initiatives yet to be developed. There are examples of pilots established by UNICEF and Government partners, including the Area-Based Pilot projects and support to District level partners in interpreting, adapting and implementing legislation. There are also examples of initiatives established by NGOs, but there seems to be a gap in coordination between Government and non-governmental pilots.
The reasons that respondents were not confident that there were models that could be replicated seemed more to do with the fact that they were uncertain of what the systems building approach is exactly, and therefore what pilots or models would be relevant or appropriate in the context of the systems building approach.
This does not mean that replicable models are not in place, introduced by UNICEF, the Government or NGOs but there is not a central place seemingly or individual organisation responsible for collating information on their effectiveness and disseminating this. This observation is consistent with findings from the recent evaluation of UNICEF’s engagement with the decentralisation process in Indonesia, which noted the inconsistency in which models tested in provinces have been scaled up, and inconsistency in documentation of good practices including where results were found to be successful.[21]
As already mentioned, this area represents a key role for UNICEF in terms of facilitating learning from the body of evidence gathered from pilots implemented by its partners and wider child protection organisations including NGOs.
83
84
84
85
10. Conclusions
Theory of Change
UNICEF faces similar challenges as most organisations working to influence development outcomes: assessing what difference they make and the value they add. Development is rarely a simple linear process of cause and effect and involves multiple actors and variables. Conventional logframes often fail to capture the complexity of change and often lead to a ‘missing middle’ between outputs and outcomes. If the programme used a theory of change, it could attempt to address the gaps by mapping out the process of change and identifying a series of interim outcomes which can be used to assess effective progress. The logframe could then be used as a planning tool (rather than solely as a reporting tool) to prioritise and design measurable programme actions. Within this is the need to fit together how the Child Protection System work stream fits alongside the other UNICEF country programme components.
Relevance
As evident in the national planning documents (RPJMN) there is strong alignment between UNICEF’s and the Government’s commitment to building the child protection system in Indonesia. This indicates a high level of relevance in terms of UNICEF’s child protection work stream goals. The strategic alignment is a result of the close working relationship between the two key partners UNICEF and BAPPENAS. UNICEF and the Government are in agreement that a child protection system is the most effective way to comprehensively and holistically protect children from harm and respond to vulnerable children.
The child protection system agenda has been progressed markedly through the Government’s adoption of policies and regulations. The contribution of UNICEF to these developments is evident in the focus of these changes which relate to the child protection system components as expressed in the Conceptual Framework. The shift towards building the child protection system marks a conceptual move towards a holistic response, and away from a sole focus on single-issues. This shift is still in progress because the level of macro reform that it requires is significant and will take time to effect.
Significant amounts of work have been done to articulate the role of government (i.e. through developing the Governance Indicator Framework). There is little doubt that the concept of a child protection system has been well received and accepted by multiple levels of government. The shift towards the systems approach requires a large number and range of stakeholders who have different levels of need to access information about the emerging child protection system, its evolution and their role in it. This has been more challenging for UNICEF to address, or rather support the government to address.
At the same time the formal (i.e. government) child protection responses need to be developed in combination with community-based responses. UNICEF’s action plan includes this as an aim but specific related activities are missing. UNICEF could have given more consideration to balancing the strategic decision to focus on upstream work with the need to bring a wide range of stakeholders (government and non-government) on board through a significant change process. This change
85
86
process includes communicating the more nuanced and complex understandings of what a child protection system means. Without this there is a risk that the ‘systems building approach’ or ‘child protection system’ simply becomes the langue la mode of development partners. To date the resources available to government stakeholders are arguably too conceptual without enough signposts to explain the systems approach or too detailed making them accessible to only the few rather than the majority. As part of this evaluation, a set of ‘roadmaps’ are proposed as tools to bridge the current simple and complex resources.
The systems building approach to child protection incorporates a commitment to all vulnerable children, but evidence was not apparent that UNICEF’s equity agenda was being fulfilled. This requires a concerted design process through an equity lens. Given UNICEF’s significant role in the conceptualisation of child protection through its partnership with BAPPENAS, it has been in a strong position to influence the equity agenda within the systems building initiative. For UNICEF the equity lens may be implicit, but for partners it may need to be made explicit.
It is evident that UNICEF has had specific roles in supporting (commissioning and providing technical advice to) child protection pilots aimed at strengthening the child protection system. At the same time there seems to have been missed opportunities to collate and distribute the evidence and learning from these initiatives. UNICEF has could have been coordinating the collection of evidence generated from its own pilots, and further afield. There are numerous non-governmental organisations also implementing pilots. This seems like an important gap that UNICEF (or another organisation with the support of UNICEF) could have filled.
Effectiveness
UNICEF’s approach has put in place solid foundations which can be built on. The activities intended to address all five elements of the system have done so to varying degrees and there are significant opportunities for this work to be built upon going forward.
A comprehensive baseline has recently been established through the Governance Indicators Framework, which relates to engagement with government. This forms an important set of measurements and can contribute to a process of prioritisation and planning for both UNICEF and the government. It could also contribute to communicating to a wide range of government (sub-national) stakeholders the aims and steps of the child protection system building process.
The results framework does not provide a logical enough flow between its elements and against which UNICEF can measure progress within intermediate results. Nor can it confidently show probable causal links between activities, intermediate results and programme component results. This is likely due to the activities and indicators being based on a previous prioritisation process, based on both national needs and limited UNICEF resourcing. But without the bigger picture being visible, the results framework in its current form creates challenges for UNICEF in demonstrating its effectiveness. A number of aspects of the framework have become implicit rather than explicit.
At the same time, UNICEF has been implementing highly relevant activities that risk not being captured by the framework, such as the child protection pilot initiatives.
86
87
Systems building activities have also contributed to the legal and policy framework in regard to child protection. The effectiveness in achieving notable changes such as the changes in law (e.g. legal age of criminal responsibility), can be attributed to UNICEF’s work with government. But there seems as though there is a tendency to continue the ‘style’ of promoting single issues. Making specific changes in the law is a process that is needed. But there is less evidence of how the programme of work has holistically considered and strategized to respond to Indonesia’s complex system of regulations and laws which may cause blockages to child protection, or coordination among multiple stakeholders.
Data and information management remains a significant gap, and UNICEF could have provided more clarity on how it aimed to address the different types of data that are needed for both policy decisions, and case management.
Nearly all of the child protection system elements from the Conceptual Framework have been focussed on through UNICEF and stakeholder activities. A challenge is that they are spread out across different provinces and districts, which means that participants see only the pilot or initiative that they are directly engaged in. There is an opportunity to bring these elements together as examples of what a child protection system consists of, so that stakeholders can begin to see what the comprehensive set of responses looks like. This would likely help address the lack of clarity among government and other stakeholders.
Efficiency
UNICEF’s challenges in measuring efficiency, including cost-efficiency of its activities in relation to building a child protection system reflect wider sectoral contextual challenges. UNICEF’s activities in Indonesia are relatively unique and therefore lack comparability data. The efficiency of the activities themselves cannot be easily measured because outcomes cannot be easily quantified. Further the activities, intermediate results and programme component results are not simple, linear cause-and-effect relationships. There are wider contextual influencing factors (positive and negative) that are similarly difficult to measure the impact of.
One of the measures of UNICEF’s efficiency is its relationships with government.31 As a key mechanism for influencing changes, this seems logical; although further consideration to how UNICEF wants to measure the relationship seems needed. For efficiency to be more measurable, the programme will benefit from elaborating its rationale for implementing activities and aiming for their respective outcomes. Overall UNICEF’s could have considered in more depth, the indicators that would be most appropriate (and possible) with which to measure cost-efficiency and efficiencies in general.
Equity
UNICEF’s equity agenda is a central tenet to its work. But as mentioned above it is largely implicit in the child protection action plan rather than explicit. This means that the equity lens which the child
31 As reflected in the evaluation question associated with this criteria
87
88
protection system should be being designed through has not been present. There is a risk that equity will continue to be overlooked without processes explicitly assessing how activities and outcomes are built into the strategy with the equity lens.
Sub-sets of equity include gender equality and empowerment of women and girls. Evidence for addressing these elements did not emerge strongly in the evaluation. These issues, along with equity, should have been part of the earliest stages of designing the child protection system.
Sustainability
The focus of the sustainability questions in the evaluation were on the likelihood of pilots and models being replicated. One of the challenges cited by Government respondents was that they were unaware themselves of models and pilots that were suitable for replication or scale up. But a fundamental issue of financing any such replication and scale up was not mentioned by any respondents. Nevertheless there were some foundations for sustaining a focus on developing a child protection system such as the increasing importance of child protection in the RPJMN.
The wider issue of sustainability of the child protection system relates very strongly to government leadership. The Government’s commitment to policy and implementation is strongly reflected in the national planning document (RPJMN). Sustainability of the child protection system also hinges on national rather than international financing. This aspect has not been a focus of UNICEF’s programme to date, and would be an important part of strategies going forward.
88
89
11. Lessons Learned
11.1. Successful initiatives and important lessons from all pilots provide an evidence base from which to build further successes, refine initiatives or translate them into other places and contexts.
11.2. There are localised examples of where the systems approach to child protection is yielding results in terms of outcomes for children and their families. This was evident where a small number of services (health, social and justice) in a specific area were working together with effective and mutual referrals as appropriate.
11.3. A systems response quickly falters if a referral needs to go outside of the area that is functioning well, to a service that is not integrated effectively. Sometimes the ‘external’ service does not have the same understanding or expectations of its role compared to those who make the referral, or sometimes it does not have the budget or mandate to act. The examples that respondents gave were often related to support children who were victims of trafficking and required repatriation across provincial boundaries. The would-be receiving authority in the child’s province of origin may not yet have integrated child protection laws or protocols, so declined requests to support repatriation.
11.4. Principles underlying the strategy need to have relevant activities associated with them to ensure that these are realised and do not remain implicit with the risk of becoming invisible. This applies to tackling the underlying causes of vulnerability, and designing the system through an equity and gender lens.
11.5. There was a strong appetite among respondents to participate in the development of the child protection system. It will be important to capitalise on this, and provide information to stakeholders through communication channels so they are informed about what is happening elsewhere, and so that over time their own understanding and capacity evolves. It seems at the moment there is simply a gap in knowledge.
11.6. The importance of language and terminology was raised numerous times by respondents, and was observed by the evaluators. The reason that ‘Child Friendly Cities’ has gained popularity may be due to its concept seeming more practical, while ‘systems building approach to child protection’ is too esoteric. In general, there seemed to be a preference for ideas and explanations to be immediately followed up with an example. Ideas communicated in this way seemed to gain greater traction.
11.7. The effective partnership with BAPPENAS will continue to remain important. However, relationships with other sectoral ministries should still be pursued bilaterally by UNICEF. There was feedback from respondents that other ministries did not yet see how child protection related to their specific areas of expertise. There is a risk that other ministries and departments could come to view child protection as the domain of BAPPENAS and the Ministry of Women’s Empowerment and Child Protection.
89
90
90
91
12. Recommendations
Based on the findings of this evaluation, the following recommendations are intended to inform the development of the next country programme action plan for UNICEF’s child protection work stream. They are directed at UNICEF, given that the unit of analysis of the evaluation is the child protection programme of the UNICEF Country Programme Document (2011-present). At the same time, the recommendations are framed in the context of UNICEF’s close relationship with the Government of Indonesia as its key partner. The recommendations were developed in consultation with UNICEF through written feedback processes. The specific findings that they relate to are noted in italics below each recommendation, and a table showing the links between the findings, conclusions and recommendations is including in the annex.
The recommendations are grouped into two key areas: UNICEF’s programme design, and UNICEF’s working relationship with the Government of Indonesia. They are not listed in priority order.
Revising the country programme design architecture to clearly articulate UNICEF’s vision and strategies to work with the government to build the child protection system
1) Develop the logic and theory of change for the next country programme action plan with greater clarity around how the components contribute to the overall goal/vision.
Theory of Change Finding #1; Effectiveness Finding #7
2) Develop internal strategies within UNICEF for the Child Protection cluster to work together with the other clusters to mutually support child protection systems building. For example, working with the Education cluster on common areas of concern would look at violence in schools and how schools develop their own child protection policies in line with the emerging system.
Theory of Change Finding #1
3) Make explicit UNICEF's aims to work towards a comprehensive child protection system and distinguish between the expected outcomes of the child protection system and the outcomes of UNICEF support to Government to develop the system.
Efficiency Finding #12
4) Determine and define the kind of cost-efficiency and Value for Money analysis which is required by UNICEF (e.g. for accountability, measuring contribution etc.), and therefore the types of data that are needed to meet these needs.
Efficiency Findings #13 and #14
5) Incorporate explicit reference to how equity and gender issues can be addressed through supporting the development of the child protection system (and include in the overall country strategy accountability mechanism for the equity and gender dimensions to be regularly reported upon).
Relevance Finding #3; Equity Findings #15 and #16
91
92
6) Where appropriate develop specific sub-system level Theories of Change which inform and specify the overall child protection systems building Theory of Change.
Relevance Finding #4; Effectiveness Findings #9 and #10
7) Develop a clear strategy on how UNICEF will support social norms change on key issues affecting children’s well-being. With a lack of evidence in relation to current and recent interventions, such as investing in robust models of social norms change for key pilots.
Effectiveness Findings #9 and #10
8) Clarify UNICEF's unique strengths and comparative advantages and thereby explicitly define UNICEF's role in the development of the child protection system. This could include continuing to investigate with the Government and NGOs experimental pilot initiatives and developing an evidence and replication strategy.
Relevance Finding #5; Sustainability Finding #18
Ensuring alignment with Government and support the realisation of Government commitments
9) Capitalise on the Government’s resounding commitment, UNICEF's leading role in providing child protection systems expertise, the strong partnership between the two actors and the progress in the legal architecture and implementation of pilots to define a shared vision for child protection in Indonesia. This could be done through the development of the Theory of Change or other design processes.
Relevance Findings #2 and #6
10) The RPJMN articulates an ambitious child protection agenda. UNICEF should carefully analyse the stated goals of the new RPJMN for child protection and ensure that appropriate strategic actions are articulated and requisite funding committed. This includes increased efforts to leverage government budgets along clear indicators for system reform.
Sustainability Finding #17
11) Clarify and simplify terminology e.g. drop "SBA" and "systems building approach" and focus language more simply on building a child protection system.
Relevance Finding #6
12) Build capacity within both lead actors (UNICEF and the Government) for Results Based Management, using contemporary tools (e.g. theories of change) and the draft ‘roadmaps’ generated as part of this evaluation in an ongoing process of capacity developmentthrough the CPAP design and implementation.
Effectiveness Finding #11
13) Support the development of a comprehensive government led research agenda and key capacity development agenda for social welfare and justice.
Effectiveness Findings #8, #10 and #11
14) Continue working closely with local authorities and civil society partners on ensuring budget allocation, policy and legislative reform aligns with national strategies and laws for children’s protection.
Effectiveness Findings #10
92
93
References
1. East Asia and the Pacific Child Protection Programme Strategy Toolkit. 2009, UNICEF East Asia and Pacific Regional Office.
2. Draft RPJMN 2015-2019. 2014, BAPPENAS.
3. RPJMN 2015-2019. 2015, BAPPENAS.
4. Indonesia Country Programme Document 2011-2015. 2011, UNICEF Indonesia.
5. RPJMN 2010-2014. 2010, BAPPENAS.
6. Mapping Child Protection Systems. A Consolidated Report of Findings in Six Target Provinces in Indonesia: Aceh, Central Java, East Java, East Nusa Tenggara, South Sulawesi and West Sulawesi. 2012, UNICEF Indonesia.
7. Patton, M.Q., Qualitative Research & Evaluation Methods: integrating theory and practice.Fourth edition ed. 2015: SAGE Publications, Inc.
8. UNEG, Norms for Evaluation in the UN System. 2005, United National Evaluation Group.
9. Statistical Yearbook of Indonesia 2014. 2014, Statistics Indonesia.
10. Indonesia's population, age 0-14 (% of total) is the population between the ages of 0 and 14 as a percentage of the total population. 2014 [cited 2014 04 December]; Available from: http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.POP.0014.TO.ZS/countries/ID?display=graph.
11. Survei Sosial Ekonomi Nasional (Susenas). 2009, Statistics Indonesia.
12. Trafficking in Persons Report. 2014, US Department of State.
13. Understanding children’s work and youth employment outcomes in Indonesia. 2012, Understanding Children’s Work (UCW) Programme.
14. More than 21 million child abuse cases reported in Indonesia since 2010. 2014 [cited 2015 12 February]; Available from: http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2014/10/23/more-21-million-child-abuse-cases-reported-indonesia-2010.html.
15. Knowledge, Attitudes and Behaviours On Violence Against Children: South Sulawesi Research Study 2013, Center for Child Protection, University of Indonesia.
16. Ending Child Marriage: Progress and prospects. 2014, UNICEF: New York.
17. Survei Sosial Ekonomi Nasional (Susenas). 2012, Statistics Indonesia.
18. Child and Family Welfare Services in Indonesia: An assessment of the system for prevention and response to abuse, violence and exploitation against children. 2010, Child Frontiers: Indonesia.
19. Government of Indonesia and UNICEF 2011-2015 Country Programme Action Plan (CPAP) Mid-Term Review Report. 2013, UNICEF and the Government of Indonesia: Jakarta.
20. Glossary of Key Terms in Evaluation and Results Based Management. 2002, OECD Development Assistance Committee.
21. Equity- Focused Formative Evaluation of UNICEF’s Engagement in the Decentralization Process in Indonesia. 2014, Harry Cummings and Associates Inc.
22. National Child Protection Systems in the East Asia and Pacific Region: A review and analysis of mappings and assessments. 2014, ECPAT International: Bangkok.
93
94
23. Re-focussing on Equity, Questions and Answers. 2010, UNICEF.
24. UNICEF Child Protection Strategy. 2008, UNICEF: New York.
25. PUSKAPA, Understanding Vulnerability: A Study on Situations that affect Family Separation and the Lives of Children in and out of Family Care (Research in DKI Jakarta, Central Java and South Sulawesi). 2014, Pusat Kajian Perlindungan Anak Universitas Indonesia.
26. Developing child protection and social work in Indonesia. Area-based pilot projects. Implementation plan and evaluation framework. 2013, Griffith University Australia.
27. Documenting the Lessons Learned: The Child Friendly – Pesantren Programme, Garut District, West Java. 2014, Commissioned by UNICEF.
28. Mid Term Review: Assessment of Country Programme 2011-2015 Results. 2013, UNICEF Indonesia.
29. The Significance of Child Protection Systems: Key Findings from a Systems Mapping Exercise in six provinces of Indonesia, in Issue Briefs. 2014, UNICEF Indonesia.
30. Kusumaningrum, S., Building a Social Protection System for Children in Indonesia: An Assessment on the Implementation of the Ministry of Social Affairs’ Social Assistance Program PKSA and Its Contribution to the Child Protection System. 2011, BADAN PERENCANAAN PEMBANGUNAN NASIONAL RI.
31. Joint Evaluation of the Paris Declaration, Phase 2, Final Report, Indonesia. 2010, BAPPENAS.
32. Alternative Report on the Third and Fourth Periodic Report of the Government of Indonesia to the Committee on the Rights of the Child (Covering the period from 1997 to 2012). 2012, National NGO Coalition for the Rights of the Child Monitoring.
33. Law Number 23 Year 2002 on Child Protection, R.o. Indonesia, Editor. 2002.
34. United Nations Treaty Collection. [cited 2014 05 December]; Available from: https://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?mtdsg_no=IV-11&chapter=4&lang=en.
35. Summary Results Matrix: Government of Indonesia – UNICEF Country Programme, 2011-2015. 2010, UNICEF.
94
95
Annex 1: Terms of Reference
95
96
96
97
97
98
98
99
99
100
100
101
101
102
102
103
103
104
104
105
An
nex
2: S
um
mar
y of
Fin
din
gs, C
oncl
usi
ons
& R
ecom
men
dat
ion
s
F
ind
ing
s C
on
clu
sio
ns
Re
com
me
nd
ati
on
s
Theory of Change
Th
eo
ry o
f C
ha
ng
e
Fin
din
g #
1 T
he
Cou
ntr
y P
rogr
amm
e A
ctio
n
Pla
n la
cks
an o
vera
rch
ing
logi
c m
odel
or
theo
ry o
f ch
ange
.
UN
ICE
F fa
ces
sim
ilar
ch
alle
nge
s as
mos
t or
gan
isat
ion
s w
orki
ng
to in
flu
ence
d
evel
opm
ent
outc
omes
: ass
essi
ng
wh
at d
iffe
ren
ce t
hey
mak
e an
d t
he
valu
e th
ey
add
. Dev
elop
men
t is
rar
ely
a si
mp
le li
nea
r p
roce
ss o
f ca
use
an
d e
ffec
t an
d
invo
lves
mu
ltip
le a
ctor
s an
d v
aria
bles
. Con
ven
tion
al lo
gfra
mes
oft
en fa
il t
o ca
ptu
re t
he
com
ple
xity
of c
han
ge a
nd
oft
en le
ad t
o a
‘mis
sin
g m
idd
le’ b
etw
een
ou
tpu
ts a
nd
ou
tcom
es. I
f th
e p
rogr
amm
e u
sed
a t
heo
ry o
f ch
ange
, it
cou
ld
atte
mp
t to
ad
dre
ss t
he
gaps
by
map
pin
g ou
t th
e p
roce
ss o
f ch
ange
an
d
iden
tify
ing
a se
ries
of i
nte
rim
ou
tcom
es w
hic
h c
an b
e u
sed
to
asse
ss e
ffec
tive
p
rogr
ess.
Th
e lo
gfra
me
cou
ld t
hen
be
use
d a
s a
pla
nn
ing
tool
(ra
ther
th
an s
olel
y as
a r
epor
tin
g to
ol)
to p
rior
itis
e an
d d
esig
n m
easu
rabl
e p
rogr
amm
e ac
tion
s.
Wit
hin
th
is is
th
e n
eed
to
fit
toge
ther
how
th
e C
hil
d P
rote
ctio
n S
yste
m w
ork
stre
am fi
ts a
lon
gsid
e th
e ot
her
UN
ICE
F c
oun
try
pro
gram
me
com
pon
ents
.
1) D
evel
op t
he
logi
c an
d t
heo
ry o
f ch
ange
for
the
nex
t co
un
try
pro
gram
me
acti
on p
lan
w
ith
gre
ater
cla
rity
aro
un
d h
ow t
he
com
pon
ents
con
trib
ute
to
the
over
all
goal
/vis
ion
.
2) D
evel
op in
tern
al s
trat
egie
s w
ith
in
UN
ICE
F fo
r th
e C
hil
d P
rote
ctio
n c
lust
er t
o w
ork
toge
ther
wit
h t
he
oth
er c
lust
ers
to
mu
tual
ly s
up
por
t ch
ild
pro
tect
ion
sys
tem
s bu
ild
ing.
For
exa
mp
le, w
orki
ng
wit
h t
he
Ed
uca
tion
clu
ster
on
com
mon
are
as o
f co
nce
rn w
ould
look
at
viol
ence
in s
choo
ls
and
how
sch
ools
dev
elop
th
eir
own
ch
ild
p
rote
ctio
n p
olic
ies
in li
ne
wit
h t
he
emer
gin
g sy
stem
.
Relevance
Re
lev
an
ce
Fin
din
g #
2 T
he
syst
ems
buil
din
g ap
pro
ach
to
chil
d p
rote
ctio
n a
lign
s cl
osel
y w
ith
th
e G
over
nm
ent’
s p
rior
itie
s as
ind
icat
ed in
th
e n
atio
nal
p
lan
nin
g d
ocu
men
ts R
PJM
N
2010
-20
14 a
nd
RP
JMN
20
15-
2019
.
As
evid
ent
in t
he
nat
ion
al p
lan
nin
g d
ocu
men
ts (
RP
JMN
) th
ere
is s
tron
g al
ign
men
t be
twee
n U
NIC
EF
’s a
nd
th
e G
over
nm
ent’
s co
mm
itm
ent
to b
uil
din
g th
e ch
ild
pro
tect
ion
sys
tem
in I
nd
ones
ia. T
his
ind
icat
es a
hig
h le
vel o
f rel
evan
ce
in t
erm
s of
UN
ICE
F’s
ch
ild
pro
tect
ion
wor
k st
ream
goa
ls. T
he
stra
tegi
c al
ign
men
t is
a r
esu
lt o
f th
e cl
ose
wor
kin
g re
lati
onsh
ip b
etw
een
th
e tw
o ke
y p
artn
ers
UN
ICE
F a
nd
BA
PP
EN
AS.
UN
ICE
F a
nd
th
e G
over
nm
ent
are
in
agre
emen
t th
at a
ch
ild
pro
tect
ion
sys
tem
is t
he
mos
t ef
fect
ive
way
to
com
pre
hen
sive
ly a
nd
hol
isti
call
y p
rote
ct c
hil
dre
n fr
om h
arm
an
d r
esp
ond
to
vuln
erab
le c
hil
dre
n.
9)
Cap
ital
ise
on t
he
Gov
ern
men
t’s
reso
un
din
g co
mm
itm
ent,
UN
ICE
F's
lead
ing
role
in p
rovi
din
g ch
ild
pro
tect
ion
sys
tem
s ex
per
tise
, th
e st
ron
g p
artn
ersh
ip b
etw
een
th
e tw
o ac
tors
an
d t
he
pro
gres
s in
th
e le
gal
arch
itec
ture
an
d im
ple
men
tati
on o
f pil
ots
to
def
ine
a sh
ared
vis
ion
for
chil
d p
rote
ctio
n in
In
don
esia
. Th
is c
ould
be
don
e th
rou
gh t
he
dev
elop
men
t of
th
e T
heo
ry o
f Ch
ange
or
oth
er d
esig
n p
roce
sses
.
105
106
F
ind
ing
s C
on
clu
sio
ns
Re
com
me
nd
ati
on
s
Fin
din
g #
3
Th
e sy
stem
s bu
ild
ing
app
roac
h t
o ch
ild
pro
tect
ion
in I
nd
ones
ia
focu
ses
on “
all v
uln
erab
le
chil
dre
n”
but
doe
s n
ot r
efle
ct a
n
equ
ity
len
s.
Th
e sy
stem
s bu
ild
ing
app
roac
h t
o ch
ild
pro
tect
ion
inco
rpor
ates
a c
omm
itm
ent
to a
ll v
uln
erab
le c
hil
dre
n, b
ut
evid
ence
was
not
ap
par
ent
that
UN
ICE
F’s
equ
ity
agen
da
was
bei
ng
fulf
ille
d. T
his
req
uir
es a
con
cert
ed d
esig
n p
roce
ss t
hro
ugh
an
eq
uit
y le
ns.
Giv
en U
NIC
EF
’s s
ign
ific
ant
role
in t
he
con
cep
tual
isat
ion
of c
hil
d
pro
tect
ion
th
rou
gh it
s p
artn
ersh
ip w
ith
BA
PP
EN
AS,
it h
as b
een
in a
str
ong
pos
itio
n t
o in
flu
ence
th
e eq
uit
y ag
end
a w
ith
in t
he
syst
ems
buil
din
g in
itia
tive
. F
or U
NIC
EF
th
e eq
uit
y le
ns
may
be
imp
lici
t, b
ut
for
par
tner
s it
may
nee
d t
o be
m
ade
exp
lici
t.
5) I
nco
rpor
ate
exp
lici
t re
fere
nce
to
how
eq
uit
y an
d g
end
er is
sues
can
be
add
ress
ed
thro
ugh
su
pp
orti
ng
the
dev
elop
men
t of
th
e ch
ild
pro
tect
ion
sys
tem
(an
d in
clu
de
in t
he
over
all c
oun
try
stra
tegy
acc
oun
tabi
lity
m
ech
anis
m fo
r th
e eq
uit
y an
d g
end
er
dim
ensi
ons
to b
e re
gula
rly
rep
orte
d u
pon
).
Fin
din
g #
4
Th
e sy
stem
s bu
ild
ing
app
roac
h
has
con
trib
ute
d t
o th
e in
clu
sion
of
cen
tral
ch
ild
pro
tect
ion
sys
tem
co
mp
onen
ts a
s d
efin
ed in
th
e U
NIC
EF
con
cep
tual
fram
ewor
k.
Th
e ch
ild
pro
tect
ion
sys
tem
age
nd
a h
as b
een
pro
gres
sed
mar
ked
ly t
hro
ugh
th
e G
over
nm
ent’
s ad
opti
on o
f pol
icie
s an
d r
egu
lati
ons.
Th
e co
ntr
ibu
tion
of U
NIC
EF
to
th
ese
dev
elop
men
ts is
evi
den
t in
th
e fo
cus
of t
hes
e ch
ange
s w
hic
h r
elat
e to
th
e ch
ild
pro
tect
ion
sys
tem
com
pon
ents
as
exp
ress
ed in
th
e C
once
ptu
al F
ram
ewor
k.
Th
e sh
ift
tow
ard
s bu
ild
ing
the
chil
d p
rote
ctio
n s
yste
m m
arks
a c
once
ptu
al m
ove
tow
ard
s a
hol
isti
c re
spon
se, a
nd
aw
ay fr
om a
sol
e fo
cus
on s
ingl
e-is
sues
. Th
is
shif
t is
sti
ll in
pro
gres
s be
cau
se t
he
leve
l of m
acro
ref
orm
th
at it
req
uir
es is
si
gnif
ican
t an
d w
ill t
ake
tim
e to
eff
ect.
6)
Wh
ere
app
rop
riat
e d
evel
op s
pec
ific
su
b-sy
stem
leve
l Th
eori
es o
f Ch
ange
wh
ich
in
form
an
d s
pec
ify
the
over
all c
hil
d
pro
tect
ion
sys
tem
s bu
ild
ing
Th
eory
of
Ch
ange
Fin
din
g #
5 U
NIC
EF
has
th
e p
oten
tial
to
mak
e ex
pli
cit
and
eff
ecti
ve it
s u
niq
ue
role
in m
anag
ing
evid
ence
em
ergi
ng
from
pil
ots.
It is
evi
den
t th
at U
NIC
EF
has
had
sp
ecif
ic r
oles
in s
up
por
tin
g (c
omm
issi
onin
g an
d p
rovi
din
g te
chn
ical
ad
vice
) ch
ild
pro
tect
ion
pil
ots
aim
ed a
t st
ren
gth
enin
g th
e ch
ild
pro
tect
ion
sys
tem
. At
the
sam
e ti
me
ther
e se
ems
to h
ave
been
m
isse
d o
pp
ortu
nit
ies
to c
olla
te a
nd
dis
trib
ute
th
e ev
iden
ce a
nd
lear
nin
g fr
om
thes
e in
itia
tive
s. U
NIC
EF
has
cou
ld h
ave
been
coo
rdin
atin
g th
e co
llec
tion
of
evid
ence
gen
erat
ed fr
om it
s ow
n p
ilot
s, a
nd
furt
her
afi
eld
. Th
ere
are
nu
mer
ous
non
-gov
ern
men
tal o
rgan
isat
ion
s al
so im
ple
men
tin
g p
ilot
s. T
his
see
ms
like
an
im
por
tan
t ga
p t
hat
UN
ICE
F (
or a
not
her
org
anis
atio
n w
ith
th
e su
ppo
rt o
f U
NIC
EF
) co
uld
hav
e fi
lled
.
8)
Cla
rify
UN
ICE
F's
un
iqu
e st
ren
gth
s an
d
com
par
ativ
e ad
van
tage
s an
d t
her
eby
exp
lici
tly
def
ine
UN
ICE
F's
rol
e in
th
e d
evel
opm
ent
of t
he
chil
d p
rote
ctio
n s
yste
m.
Th
is c
ould
incl
ud
e co
nti
nu
ing
to in
vest
igat
e w
ith
th
e G
over
nm
ent
and
NG
Os
exp
erim
enta
l pil
ot in
itia
tive
s an
d d
evel
opin
g an
evi
den
ce a
nd
rep
lica
tion
str
ateg
y.
106
107
F
ind
ing
s C
on
clu
sio
ns
Re
com
me
nd
ati
on
s
Fin
din
g #
6
Th
ere
is n
o sh
ared
un
der
stan
din
g of
th
e vi
sion
for
or t
erm
inol
ogy
in
rela
tion
to
buil
din
g a
chil
d
pro
tect
ion
sys
tem
.
Sign
ific
ant
amou
nts
of w
ork
hav
e be
en d
one
to a
rtic
ula
te t
he
role
of g
over
nm
ent
(i.e
. th
rou
gh d
evel
opin
g th
e G
over
nan
ce I
nd
icat
or F
ram
ewor
k). T
her
e is
litt
le
dou
bt t
hat
th
e co
nce
pt
of a
ch
ild
pro
tect
ion
sys
tem
has
bee
n w
ell r
ecei
ved
an
d
acce
pte
d b
y al
l lev
els
of g
over
nm
ent.
Th
e sh
ift
tow
ard
s th
e sy
stem
s ap
pro
ach
a
larg
e n
um
ber
and
ran
ge o
f sta
keh
old
ers
wh
o h
ave
dif
fere
nt
leve
ls o
f nee
d t
o ac
cess
info
rmat
ion
abo
ut
the
emer
gin
g ch
ild
pro
tect
ion
sys
tem
, its
evo
luti
on a
nd
th
eir
role
in it
. Th
is h
as b
een
mor
e ch
alle
ngi
ng
for
UN
ICE
F t
o ad
dre
ss, o
r ra
ther
su
pp
ort
the
gove
rnm
ent
to a
dd
ress
.
At
the
sam
e ti
me
the
form
al (
i.e. g
over
nm
ent)
ch
ild
pro
tect
ion
res
pon
ses
nee
d t
o be
dev
elop
ed in
com
bin
atio
n w
ith
com
mu
nit
y-ba
sed
res
pon
ses.
UN
ICE
F’s
ac
tion
pla
n in
clu
des
th
is a
s an
aim
bu
t sp
ecif
ic r
elat
ed a
ctiv
itie
s ar
e m
issi
ng.
U
NIC
EF
cou
ld h
ave
give
n m
ore
con
sid
erat
ion
to
bala
nci
ng
the
stra
tegi
c d
ecis
ion
to
focu
s on
up
stre
am w
ork
wit
h t
he
nee
d t
o br
ing
a w
ide
ran
ge o
f sta
keh
old
ers
(gov
ern
men
t an
d n
on-g
over
nm
ent)
on
boa
rd t
hro
ugh
a s
ign
ific
ant
chan
ge
pro
cess
. Th
is c
han
ge p
roce
ss in
clu
des
com
mu
nic
atin
g th
e m
ore
nu
ance
d a
nd
co
mp
lex
un
der
stan
din
gs o
f wh
at a
ch
ild
pro
tect
ion
sys
tem
mea
ns.
Wit
hou
t th
is
ther
e is
a r
isk
that
th
e ‘s
yste
ms
buil
din
g ap
pro
ach
’ or
‘ch
ild
pro
tect
ion
sys
tem
’ si
mp
ly b
ecom
es t
he
‘late
st la
ngu
age’
of d
evel
opm
ent
part
ner
s. T
o d
ate
the
reso
urc
es a
vail
able
to
gove
rnm
ent
stak
ehol
der
s ar
e ar
guab
ly t
oo s
imp
le w
ith
out
enou
gh s
ign
post
s to
exp
lain
th
e sy
stem
s ap
pro
ach
an
d t
oo c
omp
lex
mak
ing
them
acc
essi
ble
to o
nly
th
e fe
w r
ath
er t
han
th
e m
ajor
ity.
9)
Cap
ital
ise
on t
he
Gov
ern
men
t’s
reso
un
din
g co
mm
itm
ent,
UN
ICE
F's
lead
ing
role
in p
rovi
din
g ch
ild
pro
tect
ion
sys
tem
s ex
per
tise
, th
e st
ron
g p
artn
ersh
ip b
etw
een
th
e tw
o ac
tors
an
d t
he
pro
gres
s in
th
e le
gal
arch
itec
ture
an
d im
ple
men
tati
on o
f pil
ots
to
def
ine
a sh
ared
vis
ion
for
chil
d p
rote
ctio
n in
In
don
esia
. Th
is c
ould
be
don
e th
rou
gh t
he
dev
elop
men
t of
th
e T
heo
ry o
f Ch
ange
or
oth
er d
esig
n p
roce
sses
.
11)
Cla
rify
an
d s
imp
lify
ter
min
olog
y e.
g. d
rop
"S
BA
" an
d "
syst
ems
buil
din
g ap
pro
ach
" an
d
focu
s la
ngu
age
mor
e si
mp
ly o
n b
uil
din
g a
chil
d p
rote
ctio
n s
yste
m.
Effectiveness
Eff
ect
ive
nes
s
Fin
din
g #
7 T
her
e ar
e as
sum
pti
ons
inh
eren
t in
th
e lo
gic
of t
he
Res
ult
s F
ram
ewor
k th
at n
eed
furt
her
te
stin
g be
fore
th
e in
dic
ator
s/ta
rget
s ca
n b
e sh
own
to
full
y re
flec
t su
cces
sfu
l ac
hie
vem
ent
of t
he
Inte
rmed
iate
R
esu
lts
and
th
e P
rogr
amm
e C
omp
onen
t R
esu
lts
Th
e re
sult
s fr
amew
ork
doe
s n
ot p
rovi
de
a lo
gica
l en
ough
flow
bet
wee
n it
s el
emen
ts a
nd
aga
inst
wh
ich
UN
ICE
F c
an m
easu
re p
rogr
ess
wit
hin
inte
rmed
iate
re
sult
s. N
or c
an it
con
fid
entl
y sh
ow p
roba
ble
cau
sal l
inks
bet
wee
n a
ctiv
itie
s,
inte
rmed
iate
res
ult
s an
d p
rogr
amm
e co
mp
onen
t re
sult
s. T
his
is li
kely
du
e to
th
e ac
tivi
ties
an
d in
dic
ator
s be
ing
base
d o
n a
pre
viou
s p
rior
itis
atio
n p
roce
ss, b
ased
on b
oth
nat
ion
al n
eed
s an
d li
mit
ed U
NIC
EF
res
ourc
ing.
Bu
t w
ith
out
the
bigg
er p
ictu
re b
ein
g vi
sibl
e, t
he
resu
lts
fram
ewor
k in
its
curr
ent
form
cre
ates
ch
alle
nge
s fo
r U
NIC
EF
in d
emon
stra
tin
g it
s ef
fect
iven
ess.
A n
um
ber
of a
spec
ts
of t
he
fram
ewor
k h
ave
beco
me
imp
lici
t ra
ther
th
an e
xpli
cit.
A
t th
e sa
me
tim
e, U
NIC
EF
has
bee
n im
plem
enti
ng
hig
hly
rel
evan
t ac
tivi
ties
th
at
risk
not
bei
ng
cap
ture
d b
y th
e fr
amew
ork,
su
ch a
s th
e ch
ild
pro
tect
ion
pil
ot
init
iati
ves.
1) D
evel
op t
he
logi
c an
d t
heo
ry o
f ch
ange
for
the
nex
t co
un
try
pro
gram
me
acti
on p
lan
w
ith
gre
ater
cla
rity
aro
un
d h
ow t
he
com
pon
ents
con
trib
ute
to
the
over
all
goal
/vis
ion
.
12)
Bu
ild
cap
acit
y w
ith
in b
oth
lead
act
ors
(UN
ICE
F a
nd
th
e G
over
nm
ent)
for
Res
ult
s B
ased
Man
agem
ent,
usi
ng
con
tem
por
ary
tool
s (e
.g. t
heo
ries
of c
han
ge)
and
th
e d
raft
‘r
oad
map
s’ g
ener
ated
as
par
t of
th
is
eval
uat
ion
in a
n o
ngo
ing
pro
cess
of c
apac
ity
dev
elop
men
t th
rou
gh t
he
CP
AP
des
ign
an
d
107
108
F
ind
ing
s C
on
clu
sio
ns
Re
com
me
nd
ati
on
s
Fin
din
g #
8
UN
ICE
F’s
su
pp
ort
to t
he
nat
ion
al
chil
d p
rote
ctio
n s
yste
m a
dd
ress
es
all f
ive
elem
ents
to
vary
ing
deg
rees
an
d t
her
e ar
e si
gnif
ican
t op
por
tun
itie
s fo
r th
is w
ork
to b
e bu
ilt
up
on g
oin
g fo
rwar
d.
UN
ICE
F’s
ow
n u
nd
erst
and
ing
of
the
deg
ree
of t
his
su
pp
ort
is
grea
ter
than
th
at o
f oth
er k
ey
resp
ond
ents
.
Syst
ems
buil
din
g ac
tivi
ties
hav
e al
so c
ontr
ibu
ted
to
the
lega
l an
d p
olic
y fr
amew
ork
in r
egar
d t
o ch
ild
pro
tect
ion
. Th
e ef
fect
iven
ess
in a
chie
vin
g n
otab
le
chan
ges
such
as
the
chan
ges
in la
w (
e.g.
lega
l age
of c
rim
inal
res
pon
sibi
lity
), c
an
be a
ttri
bute
d t
o U
NIC
EF
’s w
ork
wit
h g
over
nm
ent.
Bu
t th
ere
seem
s as
th
ough
th
ere
is a
ten
den
cy t
o co
nti
nu
e th
e ‘s
tyle
’ of p
rom
otin
g si
ngl
e is
sues
. Mak
ing
spec
ific
ch
ange
s in
th
e la
w is
a p
roce
ss t
hat
is n
eed
ed. B
ut
ther
e is
less
evi
den
ce
of h
ow t
he
pro
gram
me
of w
ork
has
hol
isti
call
y co
nsi
der
ed a
nd
str
ateg
ized
to
resp
ond
to
Ind
ones
ia’s
com
ple
x sy
stem
of
regu
lati
ons
and
law
s w
hic
h m
ay c
ause
bl
ocka
ges
to c
hil
d p
rote
ctio
n, a
nd
coo
rdin
atio
n a
mon
g m
ult
iple
sta
keh
old
ers.
D
ata
and
info
rmat
ion
man
agem
ent
rem
ain
s a
sign
ific
ant
gap
, an
d U
NIC
EF
co
uld
hav
e p
rovi
ded
mor
e cl
arit
y on
how
it a
imed
to
add
ress
th
e d
iffe
ren
t ty
pes
of
dat
a th
at a
re n
eed
ed fo
r bo
th p
olic
y d
ecis
ion
s, a
nd
cas
e m
anag
emen
t.
Nea
rly
all o
f th
e ch
ild
pro
tect
ion
sys
tem
ele
men
ts fr
om t
he
Con
cept
ual
F
ram
ewor
k h
ave
been
tar
gete
d t
hro
ugh
UN
ICE
F a
nd
sta
keh
old
er a
ctiv
itie
s. A
ch
alle
nge
is t
hat
th
ey a
re s
pre
ad o
ut
acro
ss d
iffe
ren
t p
rovi
nce
s an
d d
istr
icts
, w
hic
h m
ean
s th
at p
arti
cip
ants
see
on
ly t
hei
r p
ilot
or
init
iati
ve. T
her
e is
an
op
por
tun
ity
to b
rin
g th
ese
elem
ents
tog
eth
er a
s ex
amp
les
of w
hat
a c
hil
d
pro
tect
ion
sys
tem
con
sist
s of
, so
that
sta
keh
old
ers
can
beg
in t
o se
e w
hat
th
e co
mp
reh
ensi
ve s
et o
f res
pon
ses
look
s li
ke. T
his
wou
ld li
kely
hel
p a
dd
ress
th
e la
ck o
f cla
rity
am
ong
gove
rnm
ent
and
oth
er s
take
hol
der
s.
imp
lem
enta
tion
.
13)
Sup
por
t th
e d
evel
opm
ent
of a
co
mp
reh
ensi
ve g
over
nm
ent
led
res
earc
h
agen
da
and
key
cap
acit
y d
evel
opm
ent
agen
da
for
soci
al w
elfa
re a
nd
just
ice.
Fin
din
g #
11
Th
e sy
stem
s bu
ild
ing
app
roac
h t
o ch
ild
pro
tect
ion
is b
road
ly
con
sid
ered
as
rele
van
t bu
t is
li
mit
ed b
y th
e la
ck o
f cla
rity
abo
ut
role
s an
d r
esp
onsi
bili
ties
for
the
over
all d
evel
opm
ent
of a
ch
ild
p
rote
ctio
n s
yste
m.
Fin
din
g #
9
Th
ere
is n
o ev
iden
ce t
hat
th
e sy
stem
s bu
ild
ing
app
roac
h h
as
con
trib
ute
d t
o sh
ifti
ng
soci
al
nor
ms
in w
ider
soc
iety
.
UN
ICE
F’s
ap
pro
ach
has
pu
t in
pla
ce s
olid
fou
nd
atio
ns
wh
ich
can
be
buil
t on
. T
he
acti
viti
es in
ten
ded
to
add
ress
all
five
ele
men
ts o
f th
e sy
stem
hav
e d
one
so t
o va
ryin
g d
egre
es a
nd
th
ere
are
sign
ific
ant
opp
ortu
nit
ies
for
this
wor
k to
be
buil
t u
pon
goi
ng
forw
ard
.
A c
omp
reh
ensi
ve b
asel
ine
has
rec
entl
y b
een
est
abli
shed
th
rou
gh t
he
Gov
ern
ance
In
dic
ator
s F
ram
ewor
k, w
hic
h r
elat
es t
o en
gage
men
t w
ith
gov
ern
men
t. T
his
fo
rms
an im
por
tan
t se
t of
mea
sure
men
ts a
nd
can
con
trib
ute
to
a p
roce
ss o
f p
rior
itis
atio
n a
nd
pla
nn
ing
for
both
UN
ICE
F a
nd
th
e go
vern
men
t. I
t co
uld
als
o co
ntr
ibu
te t
o co
mm
un
icat
ing
to a
wid
e ra
nge
of g
over
nm
ent
(su
b-n
atio
nal
) st
akeh
old
ers
the
aim
s an
d s
tep
s of
th
e ch
ild
pro
tect
ion
sys
tem
bu
ild
ing
pro
cess
.
6)
Wh
ere
app
rop
riat
e d
evel
op s
pec
ific
su
b-sy
stem
leve
l Th
eori
es o
f Ch
ange
wh
ich
in
form
an
d s
pec
ify
the
over
all c
hil
d
pro
tect
ion
sys
tem
s bu
ild
ing
Th
eory
of
Ch
ange
.
7) D
evel
op a
cle
ar s
trat
egy
on h
ow U
NIC
EF
w
ill s
up
por
t so
cial
nor
ms
chan
ge o
n k
ey
issu
es a
ffec
tin
g ch
ild
ren
’s w
ell-
bein
g. W
ith
a
lack
of e
vid
ence
in r
elat
ion
to
curr
ent
and
re
cen
t in
terv
enti
ons,
th
is c
ould
focu
s on
in
vest
ing
in r
obu
st m
odel
s of
soc
ial n
orm
s ch
ange
for
key
pil
ots.
13)
Sup
por
t th
e d
evel
opm
ent
of a
co
mp
reh
ensi
ve g
over
nm
ent
led
res
earc
h
agen
da
and
key
cap
acit
y d
evel
opm
ent
Fin
din
g #
10
Th
ere
was
litt
le e
vid
ence
re
gard
ing
the
exte
nt
to w
hic
h
cap
acit
y of
du
ty b
eare
rs h
as b
een
im
pro
ved
, wit
h m
easu
rem
ent
imp
aire
d a
s th
ere
was
no
base
lin
e d
ata
on c
apac
ity.
108
109
F
ind
ing
s C
on
clu
sio
ns
Re
com
me
nd
ati
on
s
agen
da
for
soci
al w
elfa
re a
nd
just
ice.
14)
Con
tin
ue
wor
kin
g cl
osel
y w
ith
loca
l au
thor
itie
s an
d c
ivil
soc
iety
par
tner
s on
en
suri
ng
bud
get
allo
cati
on, p
olic
y an
d
legi
slat
ive
refo
rm a
lign
s w
ith
nat
ion
al
stra
tegi
es a
nd
law
s fo
r ch
ild
ren
’s p
rote
ctio
n.
Efficiency
Eff
icie
ncy
Fin
din
g #
12
All
of t
he
five
ele
men
ts o
f Th
e N
atio
nal
Ch
ild
Pro
tect
ion
Sys
tem
C
once
ptu
al F
ram
ewor
k ar
e ap
par
ent
to v
aryi
ng
deg
rees
in t
he
UN
ICE
F’s
20
11-2
015
Cou
ntr
y P
rogr
amm
e.
UN
ICE
F’s
ch
alle
nge
s in
mea
suri
ng
effi
cien
cy, i
ncl
ud
ing
cost
-eff
icie
ncy
of i
ts
acti
viti
es in
rel
atio
n t
o bu
ild
ing
a ch
ild
pro
tect
ion
sys
tem
ref
lect
wid
er s
ecto
ral
con
text
ual
ch
alle
nge
s. U
NIC
EF
’s a
ctiv
itie
s in
In
don
esia
are
rel
ativ
ely
un
iqu
e an
d
ther
efor
e la
ck c
omp
arab
ilit
y d
ata.
Th
e ef
fici
ency
of t
he
acti
viti
es t
hem
selv
es
can
not
be
easi
ly m
easu
red
bec
ause
ou
tcom
es c
ann
ot b
e ea
sily
qu
anti
fied
. F
urt
her
th
e ac
tivi
ties
, in
term
edia
te r
esu
lts
and
pro
gram
me
com
pon
ent
resu
lts
are
not
sim
ple
, lin
ear
cau
se-a
nd
-eff
ect
rela
tion
ship
s. T
her
e ar
e w
ider
con
text
ual
in
flu
enci
ng
fact
ors
(pos
itiv
e an
d n
egat
ive)
th
at a
re s
imil
arly
dif
ficu
lt t
o m
easu
re
the
imp
act
of.
3) M
ake
exp
lici
t U
NIC
EF
's a
ims
to w
ork
tow
ard
s a
com
pre
hen
sive
ch
ild
pro
tect
ion
sy
stem
an
d d
isti
ngu
ish
bet
wee
n t
he
expe
cted
ou
tcom
es o
f th
e ch
ild
pro
tect
ion
sys
tem
an
d
the
outc
omes
of U
NIC
EF
su
pp
ort
to
Gov
ern
men
t to
dev
elop
th
e sy
stem
.
Fin
din
g #
13
UN
ICE
F h
as d
evel
oped
som
e h
igh
ly c
olla
bora
tive
rel
atio
nsh
ips
wit
h k
ey G
over
nm
ent
par
tner
s,
par
ticu
larl
y B
AP
PE
NA
S, M
OSA
an
d M
OW
EC
P.
On
e of
th
e m
easu
res
of U
NIC
EF
’s e
ffic
ien
cy is
its
rela
tion
ship
s w
ith
gov
ern
men
t.
As
a ke
y m
ech
anis
m fo
r in
flu
enci
ng
chan
ges,
th
is s
eem
s lo
gica
l; a
lth
ough
furt
her
co
nsi
der
atio
n t
o h
ow U
NIC
EF
wan
ts t
o m
easu
re t
he
rela
tion
ship
see
ms
nee
ded
. F
or e
ffic
ien
cy t
o be
mor
e m
easu
rabl
e, t
he
pro
gram
me
wil
l ben
efit
from
el
abor
atin
g it
s ra
tion
ale
for
imp
lem
enti
ng
acti
viti
es a
nd
aim
ing
for
thei
r re
spec
tive
ou
tcom
es. O
vera
ll U
NIC
EF
’s c
ould
hav
e co
nsi
der
ed in
mor
e d
epth
, th
e in
dic
ator
s th
at w
ould
be
mos
t ap
pro
pri
ate
(an
d p
ossi
ble)
wit
h w
hic
h t
o m
easu
re c
ost-
effi
cien
cy a
nd
eff
icie
nci
es in
gen
eral
.
4)
Det
erm
ine
and
def
ine
the
kin
d o
f cos
t-ef
fici
ency
an
d V
alu
e fo
r M
oney
an
alys
is
wh
ich
is r
equ
ired
by
UN
ICE
F (
e.g.
for
acco
un
tabi
lity
, mea
suri
ng
con
trib
uti
on e
tc.)
, an
d t
her
efor
e th
e ty
pes
of d
ata
that
are
n
eed
ed t
o m
eet
thes
e n
eed
s.
Fin
din
g #
14
Mu
lti-
sect
or e
nga
gem
ent
cert
ain
ly s
eem
s to
tak
e p
lace
th
rou
gh t
he
Pok
ja, b
ut
resp
ond
ents
at
all l
evel
s st
ated
th
at t
his
cou
ld b
e st
ren
gth
ened
fu
rth
er, p
arti
cula
rly
at s
ub-
nat
ion
al le
vel.
109
110
F
ind
ing
s C
on
clu
sio
ns
Re
com
me
nd
ati
on
s
Equity
Eq
uit
y
Fin
din
g #
15
UN
ICE
F’s
equ
ity
agen
da
is y
et t
o be
re
alis
ed t
hro
ugh
th
e sy
stem
s bu
ild
ing
app
roac
h t
o ch
ild
pro
tect
ion
in
Ind
ones
ia.
UN
ICE
F’s
equ
ity
agen
da
is a
cen
tral
ten
et t
o it
s w
ork.
Bu
t as
men
tion
ed
abov
e it
is la
rgel
y im
pli
cit
in t
he
chil
d p
rote
ctio
n a
ctio
n p
lan
rat
her
th
an
exp
lici
t. T
his
mea
ns
that
th
e eq
uit
y le
ns
wh
ich
th
e ch
ild
pro
tect
ion
sys
tem
sh
ould
be
bein
g d
esig
ned
th
rou
gh h
as n
ot b
een
pre
sen
t. T
her
e is
a r
isk
that
eq
uit
y w
ill c
onti
nu
e to
be
over
look
ed w
ith
out
pro
cess
es e
xpli
citl
y as
sess
ing
how
act
ivit
ies
and
ou
tcom
es a
re b
uil
t in
to t
he
stra
tegy
wit
h t
he
equ
ity
len
s.
5) I
nco
rpor
ate
exp
lici
t re
fere
nce
to
how
eq
uit
y an
d g
end
er is
sues
can
be
add
ress
ed
thro
ugh
su
pp
orti
ng
the
dev
elop
men
t of
th
e ch
ild
pro
tect
ion
sys
tem
(an
d in
clu
de
in t
he
over
all c
oun
try
stra
tegy
acc
oun
tabi
lity
m
ech
anis
m fo
r th
e eq
uit
y an
d g
end
er
dim
ensi
ons
to b
e re
gula
rly
rep
orte
d u
pon
).
Fin
din
g #
16
Evi
den
ce fo
r ad
dre
ssin
g ge
nd
er
ineq
ual
itie
s an
d t
he
emp
ower
men
t of
w
omen
an
d g
irls
did
not
em
erge
st
ron
gly
in t
he
eval
uat
ion
.
Sub-
sets
of e
quit
y in
clu
de
gen
der
equ
alit
y an
d e
mp
ower
men
t of
wom
en
and
gir
ls. E
vid
ence
for
add
ress
ing
thes
e el
emen
ts d
id n
ot e
mer
ge s
tron
gly
in t
he
eval
uat
ion
. Th
ese
issu
es, a
lon
g w
ith
equ
ity,
sh
ould
hav
e be
en p
art
of
the
earl
iest
sta
ges
of d
esig
nin
g th
e ch
ild
pro
tect
ion
sys
tem
.
Sustainability
Su
sta
ina
bil
ity
Fin
din
g #
17
Th
ere
are
som
e st
ron
g en
abli
ng
fact
ors
for
rep
lica
tion
an
d s
ust
ain
abil
ity,
n
otab
ly t
he
incr
easi
ng
impo
rtan
ce o
f ch
ild
pro
tect
ion
in t
he
RP
JMN
, an
d
alth
ough
th
ere
are
also
con
stra
ints
, th
ese
con
stra
ints
are
bei
ng
or c
an b
e ad
dre
ssed
.
Th
e fo
cus
of t
he
sust
ain
abil
ity
ques
tion
s in
th
e ev
alu
atio
n w
ere
on t
he
like
lih
ood
of p
ilot
s an
d m
odel
s be
ing
rep
lica
ted
. On
e of
th
e ch
alle
nge
s ci
ted
by
Gov
ern
men
t re
spon
den
ts w
as t
hat
th
ey w
ere
un
awar
e th
emse
lves
of
mod
els
and
pil
ots
that
wer
e su
itab
le fo
r re
pli
cati
on o
r sc
ale
up
. Bu
t a
fun
dam
enta
l iss
ue
of fi
nan
cin
g an
y su
ch r
epli
cati
on a
nd
sca
le u
p w
as n
ot
men
tion
ed b
y an
y re
spon
den
ts.
Nev
erth
eles
s th
ere
wer
e so
me
fou
nd
atio
ns
for
sust
ain
ing
a fo
cus
on d
evel
opin
g a
chil
d p
rote
ctio
n s
yste
m s
uch
as
the
incr
easi
ng
imp
orta
nce
of c
hil
d p
rote
ctio
n in
th
e R
PJM
N.
Th
e w
ider
issu
e of
su
stai
nab
ilit
y of
th
e ch
ild
pro
tect
ion
sys
tem
rel
ates
ver
y st
ron
gly
to g
over
nm
ent
lead
ersh
ip. T
he
Gov
ern
men
t’s
com
mit
men
t to
p
olic
y an
d im
ple
men
tati
on is
str
ongl
y re
flec
ted
in t
he
nat
ion
al p
lan
nin
g d
ocu
men
t (R
PJM
N).
Su
stai
nab
ilit
y of
th
e ch
ild
pro
tect
ion
sys
tem
als
o h
inge
s on
nat
ion
al r
ath
er t
han
inte
rnat
ion
al fi
nan
cin
g. T
his
asp
ect
has
not
be
en a
focu
s of
UN
ICE
F’s
pro
gram
me
to d
ate,
an
d w
ould
be
an im
por
tan
t p
art
of s
trat
egie
s go
ing
forw
ard
.
10)
Th
e R
PJM
N a
rtic
ula
tes
an a
mbi
tiou
s ch
ild
pro
tect
ion
age
nd
a. U
NIC
EF
sh
ould
ca
refu
lly
anal
yse
the
stat
ed g
oals
of t
he
new
R
PJM
N fo
r ch
ild
pro
tect
ion
an
d e
nsu
re t
hat
ap
pro
pri
ate
stra
tegi
c ac
tion
s ar
e ar
ticu
late
d
and
req
uis
ite
fun
din
g co
mm
itte
d. T
his
in
clu
des
incr
ease
d e
ffor
ts t
o le
vera
ge
gove
rnm
ent
bud
gets
alo
ng
clea
r in
dic
ator
s fo
r sy
stem
ref
orm
.
8)
Cla
rify
UN
ICE
F's
un
iqu
e st
ren
gth
s an
d
com
par
ativ
e ad
van
tage
s an
d t
her
eby
exp
lici
tly
def
ine
UN
ICE
F's
rol
e in
th
e d
evel
opm
ent
of t
he
chil
d p
rote
ctio
n s
yste
m.
Th
is c
ould
incl
ud
e co
nti
nu
ing
to in
vest
igat
e w
ith
th
e G
over
nm
ent
and
NG
Os
exp
erim
enta
l pil
ot in
itia
tive
s an
d d
evel
opin
g an
evi
den
ce a
nd
rep
lica
tion
str
ateg
y.
Fin
din
g #
18
Th
e ea
rly
stag
es o
f im
ple
men
tin
g th
is
app
roac
h m
ean
th
at t
her
e ar
e n
ot m
any
mod
els/
pil
ots
in p
lace
, an
d t
he
ones
th
at a
re in
pla
ce a
re n
ot w
ell k
now
n
amon
g re
spon
den
ts. T
her
e is
an
ap
pet
ite
amon
gst
stak
ehol
der
s fo
r th
is
leve
l of d
etai
l of i
nfo
rmat
ion
an
d
sup
por
t to
rep
lica
te g
ood
pra
ctic
e.
110
111
An
nex
3: E
valu
atio
n M
atri
x
Cri
teri
a
Qu
est
ion
s S
ub
-Qu
est
ion
s In
dic
ato
r a
nd
d
ata
D
ata
so
urc
es
Me
tho
d o
f D
ata
Co
lle
ctio
n
Rel
evan
ce
How
rel
evan
t is
th
e SB
A t
o ch
ild
p
rote
ctio
n in
In
don
esia
’s d
ynam
ic
oper
atin
g en
viro
nm
ent
of e
con
omic
gr
owth
an
d s
tatu
s as
an
em
ergi
ng
Mid
dle
In
com
e C
oun
try
(MIC
) an
d w
ith
re
fere
nce
to
the
cou
ntr
y’s
size
, fre
quen
t n
atu
ral d
isas
ters
, dec
entr
alis
atio
n a
nd
cu
ltu
ral d
iver
sity
an
d o
ther
asp
ects
?
Wh
at d
oes
the
app
roac
h c
onta
in
that
mee
ts t
he
nee
ds
of b
uil
din
g a
chil
d p
rote
ctio
n s
yste
m in
In
don
esia
; wh
at is
mis
sin
g?
Con
firm
atio
n o
f ap
pro
pri
aten
ess
and
iden
tifi
cati
on
of g
aps
UN
ICE
F p
rogr
amm
e an
d p
olic
y d
ocu
men
ts, G
over
nm
ent
(law
an
d
pol
icy)
doc
um
ents
at
all l
evel
s of
go
vern
ance
, IN
GO
doc
um
ents
.
All
par
tici
pat
ing
adu
lt s
take
hol
der
s
Th
e SB
A c
once
pt
is w
ell d
escr
ibed
in
UN
ICE
F g
loba
l an
d n
atio
nal
d
ocu
men
ts, a
nd
th
e ac
tivi
ties
th
at
UN
ICE
F u
nd
erta
kes
are
reco
rded
in
cou
ntr
y p
rogr
amm
e d
ocu
men
ts. I
n
add
itio
n, c
onsu
ltat
ion
s w
ith
st
akeh
old
ers
in J
akar
ta, C
entr
al J
ava,
So
uth
Su
law
esi a
nd
Ace
h w
ill i
nfo
rm
the
dis
cuss
ion
of
the
both
In
don
esia
’s
con
text
an
d S
BA
in p
ract
ice.
Lit
erat
ure
rev
iew
Inte
rvie
ws
Con
sult
atio
n w
ith
Po
kja
on
27th
Au
gust
Surv
ey
Fu
rth
er c
onsu
ltat
ion
usi
ng
BB
N
app
roac
h d
uri
ng
pre
sen
tati
on o
f re
sult
s (s
econ
d v
isit
)
Rev
iew
of
Con
cep
tual
F
ram
ewor
k:
111
112
To
wh
at e
xten
t is
th
e SB
A a
lign
ed w
ith
th
e re
sult
s of
th
e U
NIC
EF
an
d p
artn
er
Ch
ild
Pro
tect
ion
Pro
gram
me
2011
to
pre
sen
t w
ith
th
e R
PJM
N 2
011
-20
14 a
nd
ot
her
nat
ion
al p
olic
ies
and
str
ateg
ies?
Ali
gnm
ent
UN
ICE
Fco
un
try
pro
gram
me
doc
um
ents
GoI
,Na
tio
na
l M
ed
ium‐T
erm
D
ev
elo
pm
en
t P
lan
(R
PJ
MN
20
10‐
20
14)
and
nat
ion
al
pol
icie
s/st
rate
gies
/law
s (s
ee S
ecti
on o
n
Dat
a So
urc
es)
Lit
erat
ure
rev
iew
Inte
rvie
ws
To
wh
at e
xten
t d
oes
UN
ICE
F’s
SB
A in
In
don
esia
ali
gn w
ith
UN
ICE
F’s
glo
bal
and
reg
ion
al (
EA
PR
O)
equ
ity
agen
da
(tar
geti
ng
mar
gin
alis
ed a
nd
vu
lner
able
gr
oup
s su
ch a
s ch
ild
mig
ran
ts, c
hil
dre
n
livi
ng
in in
stit
uti
ons,
ch
ild
ren
fro
m
eth
nic
min
orit
ies,
am
ong
oth
ers)
an
d
chil
d p
rote
ctio
n s
trat
egie
s?
Ali
gnm
ent
UN
ICE
F C
hil
d P
rote
ctio
n p
rogr
amm
e d
ocu
men
tati
on a
nd
inte
rvie
ws
wit
h
stak
ehol
der
s
UN
ICE
F’s
Glo
bal
Ch
ild
Pro
tect
ion
St
rate
gy, E
AP
RO
Ch
ild
Pro
tect
ion
St
rate
gy a
nd
UN
ICE
F’s
Ap
pro
ach
to
Equ
ity
Com
par
ison
wit
h d
esig
n
doc
um
ents
an
d e
vid
ence
of
imp
lem
enta
tion
an
d
ach
ieve
men
ts (
doc
um
ente
d a
nd
th
rou
gh c
onsu
ltat
ion
wit
h
stak
ehol
der
s to
iden
tify
not
-yet
d
ocu
men
ted
evi
den
ce)
Eff
ecti
ven
ess
To
wh
at e
xten
t h
as t
he
SBA
st
ren
gth
ened
th
e n
atio
nal
ch
ild
p
rote
ctio
n s
yste
m a
nd
th
e fi
ve k
ey
elem
ents
, fro
m t
he
per
spec
tive
s of
key
st
akeh
old
ers
incl
ud
ing
nat
ion
al a
nd
su
b-n
atio
nal
gov
ern
men
t, c
ivil
soc
iety
an
d c
omm
un
itie
s?
Evi
den
ce o
f SB
A
infl
uen
ce in
st
ren
gth
enin
g
Inte
rvie
ws
Surv
ey
To
wh
at e
xten
th
as t
he
SBA
im
ple
men
ted
by
UN
ICE
F s
ince
20
11 a
nd
p
artn
ers
led
to
sust
ain
ed im
pro
vem
ent
of t
he
cap
acit
y of
ch
ild
pro
tect
ion
du
ty
bear
ers
in t
he
soci
al w
elfa
re a
nd
just
ice
for
chil
dre
n s
yste
ms
in I
nd
ones
ia?
D
efin
e “s
ust
ain
ed”
D
efin
e “i
mp
rove
men
t”
D
efin
e “c
apac
ity”
Evi
den
ce o
f in
stit
uti
onal
ch
ange
in
atti
tud
es a
nd
p
ract
ices
am
ong
pol
icy
mak
ers/
im
ple
men
ters
UN
ICE
F c
oun
try
pro
gram
me
doc
um
ents
Stak
ehol
der
s
Lit
erat
ure
rev
iew
Inte
rvie
ws
Surv
ey
To
wh
at e
xten
t h
as t
he
SBA
ap
pro
ach
im
ple
men
ted
by
UN
ICE
F a
nd
par
tner
s co
ntr
ibu
ted
to
shif
tin
g so
cial
nor
ms
arou
nd
vio
len
ce, e
xplo
itat
ion
, abu
se a
nd
n
egle
ct o
f ch
ild
ren
?
A
mon
g go
v an
d n
on-g
ov
stak
ehol
der
s (i
nd
ivid
ual
an
d
orga
nis
atio
nal
leve
ls)
A
s re
flec
ted
in p
olic
ies
and
st
rate
gies
At
nat
ion
al, s
ub-
nat
ion
al
Evi
den
ce o
f SB
A
infl
uen
ce o
n
chan
ges
in
atti
tud
es a
nd
p
ract
ices
at
com
mu
nit
y le
vel
Doc
um
ents
wit
h c
onte
xtu
al m
app
ing
of
soci
al n
orm
s (i
ncl
ud
ing
avai
labl
e d
ata)
Stak
ehol
der
s
Surv
ey
112
113
and
gov
ern
men
tal l
evel
s
Wh
at u
nin
ten
ded
ou
tcom
es, p
osit
ive
as
wel
l as
neg
ativ
e, h
ave
resu
lted
fro
m t
he
SBA
ap
pro
ach
ad
opte
d b
y U
NIC
EF
an
d
par
tner
s in
In
don
esia
? If
th
ere
is a
n
egat
ive
outc
ome,
is it
rel
ated
to
“th
eore
tica
l fai
lure
” or
imp
lem
enta
tion
fa
ilu
re?
Incl
ud
e d
iscu
ssio
n w
ith
st
akeh
old
ers
on im
pli
cati
ons
for
lear
nin
g, a
chie
vin
g im
pac
t an
d
futu
re p
lan
nin
g.
Res
ult
sU
NIC
EF
Pro
gram
me
doc
um
enta
tion
Stak
ehol
der
s
Lit
erat
ure
rev
iew
Inte
rvie
ws
Wh
at h
as b
een
th
e ad
ded
val
ue
of
UN
ICE
F in
In
don
esia
’s s
up
por
t to
SB
A
in t
he
wid
er e
ffor
ts t
o p
rote
ct c
hil
dre
n
from
har
m?
Un
iqu
eco
ntr
ibu
tion
s of
U
NIC
EF
act
ivit
ies
Stak
ehol
der
sIn
terv
iew
s
Eff
icie
ncy
How
eff
icie
ntl
y h
as U
NIC
EF
use
d t
he
avai
labl
e re
sou
rces
to
del
iver
hig
h
qual
ity
outp
uts
in a
tim
ely
man
ner
an
d
to a
chie
ve t
arge
ted
obj
ecti
ves
thro
ugh
th
e cu
rren
t U
NIC
EF
20
11-p
rese
nt
Cou
ntr
y P
rogr
amm
e?
Th
e ev
alu
atio
n w
ill d
efin
e ef
fici
ency
as
the
exte
nt
to w
hic
h
the
inte
rven
tion
s co
nve
rted
re
sou
rces
to
ach
ieve
th
e m
axim
um
p
ossi
ble
outp
uts
, ou
tcom
es a
nd
im
pac
ts w
ith
th
e m
inim
um
p
ossi
ble
inp
uts
.
Th
e ev
alu
atio
n w
ill f
ocu
s on
U
NIC
EF
’s in
terv
enti
ons
to
sup
por
t th
e d
evel
opm
ent
of t
he
five
CP
sys
tem
ele
men
ts, a
nd
th
e ob
ject
ives
as
arti
cula
ted
in t
he
UN
ICE
F lo
gfra
me,
an
d
gove
rnm
ent
targ
ets.
Cos
t of
act
ivit
ies
in lo
gfra
me
and
ti
min
g of
th
eir
del
iver
y
UN
ICE
F 2
011
-pre
sen
t C
oun
try
Pro
gram
me
Doc
um
ent
and
dis
cuss
ion
on
res
ourc
ing
wit
h U
NIC
EF
st
akeh
old
ers
Lit
erat
ure
rev
iew
Inte
rvie
ws
How
cos
t ef
fect
ive
hav
e in
terv
enti
ons
in
the
five
ele
men
ts o
f th
e ch
ild
pro
tect
ion
sy
stem
bee
n in
ach
ievi
ng
targ
eted
ob
ject
ives
for
UN
ICE
F, b
ut
also
for
Gov
ern
men
t (b
ased
on
ava
ilab
le d
ata)
?
A q
uan
tita
tive
an
alys
is o
f al
tern
ativ
e ap
pro
ach
es t
o ac
hie
vin
g th
e sa
me
outp
uts
wil
l n
ot b
e p
ossi
ble,
bu
t qu
alit
ativ
e in
quir
y ca
n b
e p
urs
ued
bas
ed o
n
per
cep
tion
s of
key
sta
keh
old
ers.
Per
cep
tion
s of
co
sts
vs r
esu
lts
UN
ICE
F 2
011
-pre
sen
t C
oun
try
Pro
gram
me
Doc
um
ent
and
dis
cuss
ion
on
res
ourc
ing
wit
h U
NIC
EF
st
akeh
old
ers
Lit
erat
ure
rev
iew
Inte
rvie
ws
113
114
To
wh
at e
xten
t h
as U
NIC
EF
est
abli
shed
m
ean
ingf
ul p
artn
ersh
ips
or c
oord
inat
ion
m
ech
anis
ms
wit
h o
ther
key
act
ors
(Gov
ern
men
t at
nat
ion
al a
nd
su
b n
atio
nal
leve
ls, c
ivil
soc
iety
, aca
dem
ia,
etc.
) th
at a
void
du
pli
cati
on o
f eff
orts
, m
isco
mm
un
icat
ion
an
d e
nsu
re c
lear
er
acco
un
tabi
liti
es?
Inst
itu
tion
alis
atio
n a
nd
fu
nct
ion
ing
of c
omm
un
icat
ion
ch
ann
els
and
co
ord
inat
edp
lan
nin
g an
d
imp
lem
enta
tion
Inte
rvie
ws
Equ
ity
(in
clu
din
g G
end
er)
To
wh
at e
xten
t h
as t
he
SBA
–
un
inte
nd
ed a
nd
inte
nd
ed-
affe
cted
p
osit
ivel
y or
neg
ativ
ely
the
mos
t vu
lner
able
ch
ild
ren
an
d f
amil
ies
in
Ind
ones
ia fr
om a
ch
ild
pro
tect
ion
equ
ity
per
spec
tive
?
Lev
el o
f p
rior
ity
give
n t
o m
ost
vuln
erab
le
Stak
ehol
der
inte
rvie
ws
and
su
pp
orti
ng
doc
um
ents
Lit
erat
ure
rev
iew
Inte
rvie
ws
Surv
ey
How
doe
s th
e cu
rren
t ad
opti
on o
f th
e SB
A in
In
don
esia
by
UN
ICE
F a
nd
p
artn
ers
add
ress
gen
der
ineq
ual
itie
s an
d
the
emp
ower
men
t of
wom
en a
nd
gir
ls in
th
e co
un
try?
Lev
el o
f p
rior
ity
give
n t
o ge
nd
er
equ
alit
y
Stak
ehol
der
inte
rvie
ws
and
su
pp
orti
ng
doc
um
ents
Lit
erat
ure
rev
iew
Inte
rvie
ws
Sust
ain
abil
ity
Wh
at a
re t
he
enab
lin
g as
wel
l as
con
stra
inin
g fa
ctor
s th
at in
flu
ence
re
pli
cati
on a
nd
su
stai
nab
ilit
y? (
at
nat
ion
al le
vel a
nd
at
sub-
nat
ion
al le
vel?
)
Per
ceiv
ed a
nd
ac
tual
bar
rier
s an
d f
acil
itat
ing
fact
ors
Stak
ehol
der
sIn
terv
iew
s
To
wh
at e
xten
t h
ave
rep
lica
ble
and
op
erat
ion
al m
odel
s fo
r SB
A in
In
don
esia
be
en s
et in
pla
ce o
r es
tabl
ish
ed b
y U
NIC
EF
an
d p
artn
ers?
Evi
den
ce o
f sc
ale
up
, an
d s
trat
egie
s St
akeh
old
er in
terv
iew
s an
d s
up
por
tin
g d
ocu
men
tsL
iter
atu
re r
evie
w
Inte
rvie
ws
Surv
ey
114
115
Annex 4: Evaluation Team Composition
The team consists of the team leader, 5 experts, 4 assistants and 1 quality assurer. Two of the five experts and all four assistants are national consultants. The team’s division of responsibility is summarised below.
Title Name Roles
Team Leader Jo Kaybryn,
Principal Consultant, IOD PARC
Evaluation design and overall management Interviews and field visit Coordination with UNICEF Jakarta and field offices,
and Government of Indonesia stakeholders Data collection in Jakarta and Central Java Integration of experts’ reports
Senior Expert Gisela Ervin-Ward,
Principal Consultant, IOD PARC Australasia
Qualitative analysis and assessment facilitation Interviews with international NGOs Data collection in Jakarta and Central Java Integration of experts’ reports
Senior Expert Dr. Kharisma Nugroho,
Director, Migunani & Mberkahi
Questionnaire development, interview and analysis Coordination of national team members Data collection in Jakarta and Aceh
ExpertNovina Suprobo,
Consultant, Migunani & Mberkahi
Data collection in Jakarta, Central Java and SouthSulawesi
Logistics and coordination
Assistants x 4 Migunani & Mberkahi Logistics and administer questionnaires Documentation of meetings and visits
Technical support provided by:
Senior Expert Guy Thompstone,
Director, Child Frontiers
Technical support and expert inputs on childprotection systems and regional expertise
Quality Assurer Sadie Watson,
Director, IOD PARC Quality assurance on evaluation outputs
Quality Assurer Riccardo Polastro
Principal Consultant, IOD PARC
Quality assurance on evaluation outputs
Assistants x 4 Migunani & Mberkahi Logistics and administer questionnaires Documentation of meetings and visits
115
116
116
117
Annex 5: List of Key Documents Reviewed
Background documents
BAPPENAS, Government of Indonesia and OECD (2010)
BAPPENAS, Joint Evaluation of the Paris Declaration, Phase 2, Final Report, Indonesia
SIDA (2009) A ripple in development? Long term perspectives on the response to the Indian Ocean tsunami 2004. A joint follow-up evaluation of the links between relief, rehabilitation and development (LRRD)
UNICEF Indonesia (no date) Building back better: Lessons learnt from Disaster Risk Reduction and Resilience Building after the Indian Ocean Tsunami in Indonesia’s Aceh Province
Government of Indonesia policies and regulations
Government of Indonesia (2007) Peraturan Pemerintah Republik Indonesia Nomor 38 Tahun 2007 Tentang Pembagian Urusan Pemerintahan Antara Pemerintah, Pemerintahan Daerah Provinsi, dan Pemerintahan Daerah Kabupaten/Kota (Indonesian Government Regulation Number 38 of 2007 about Government Affairs Division between the Government, Government Provincial, and Local Government District / City)
Government of Indonesia (2013) Evaluasi Paruh Waktu RPJMN 2010-2014 (Mid-Term Evaluation of RPJMN)
Government of Indonesia (2010) National Medium‐Term Development Plan (RPJMN 2010‐2014)
Government of Indonesia (2014) DRAFT technocratic RPJMN 2015-2019
Mihardja (2014) Background Study RPJMN 2015-2019 dan Evaluasi Bidang Perlindungan Anak: Analisis Kerangka Hukum Internasional dan Nasional (Background Study RPJMN and Field Evaluation of Child Protection: Legal Framework Analysis International and National)
UNICEF Global & Regional documents
UNICEF (2008) UNICEF Child Protection Strategy
117
118
UNICEF EAPRO (2012) Child Maltreatment. Prevalence, Incidence and Consequences in East Asia and the Pacific. A Systematic Review of Research.
UNICEF EAPRO (no date) Child Protection Programme Strategy Toolkit
UNICEF (2010) Thematic Report: Child Protection From Violence, Exploitation and Abuse
Systems approach to child protection
World Vision (2011) A Systems Approach to Child Protection. A World Vision Discussion Paper
UNICEF (2014) Toward a typology for child protection systems (presentation)
“A Better Way to Protect ALL Children” Conference (2013)
Towards a Typology for Child Protection Systems, Revised Discussion Paper, July 2013
UNICEF (2013) Conference Report: A Better Way to Protect ALL Children. The Theory and Practice of Child Protection Systems, 13–16 November 2012, New Delhi, India
UNICEF (2010) Child Protection and Child Welfare in Asia and the Pacific. Discussion Paper. High-Level Meeting on Cooperation for Child Rights in the Asia-Pacific Region, Beijing, China 4-6 November 2010
UNICEF (2010) Adapting a Systems Approach to Child Protection: Key Concepts and Considerations
Save the Children (2010) Child Protection Initiative Building rights-based national child protection systems: a concept paper to support Save the Children’s work
UNICEF (2012) Roll Out of System Building Approach. Study Report
UNICEF (no date) Child Protection Systems Mapping And Assessment Toolkit Users Guide
UNICEF EAPRO (2012) Measuring and Monitoring Child Protection Systems. Proposed Regional Core Indicators for East Asia and the Pacific
South East Asia and Pacific Child Protection Working Group/ Child Frontiers (2014)
National Child Protection Systems in the East Asia and Pacific Region. A Review and Analysis of Mappings and Assessments
UNICEF (2008) UNICEF Child Protection Meta-Evaluation
118
119
Child protection in Indonesia
UNICEF Indonesia (2013) Poverty Reduction, Social Protection and Child Protection in Indonesia: Commitment, Progress and Work Ahead
UNICEF Indonesia (2004) External Evaluation: Institution Building & Mainstreaming Child Protection in Indonesia
3rd AIPA Caucus Report (no date)
Indonesia’s Country Report on Welfare and the Protection of Children
BAPPENAS (2012) Strengthening the Child Protection System in Indonesia through the System Building Approach (presentation)
UNICEF Indonesia (2011) Aporan Hasil Pemetaan Sistem Perlindungan Anak Aceh 2010-2011 (Child Protection System Mapping Results – Aceh)
UNICEF Indonesia (2011) Aporan Sistem Perlindungan Anak Jawa Tengah 2011 (Child Protection System Mapping Results – Central Java)
UNICEF Indonesia (2011) Aporan Sistem Perlindungan Anak Sulawesi Barat 2011 (Child Protection System Mapping Results – West Sulawesi)
UNICEF Indonesia (2011) Aporan Sistem Perlindungan Anak Sulawesi Selatan 2011 (Child Protection System Mapping Results – South Sulawesi)
UNICEF Indonesia (2012) SBA Training Modules “Sebuah pendekatan pengembangan sistem terhadap Perlindungan Anak: Sebuah Strategi untuk membangun Lingkungan Protektif untuk Anak di Indonesia” (An approach to the development of the child protection system : A Strategy for building a Protective Environment for Children in Indonesia)
UNICEF Indonesia (no date) Strengthening Child Protection Systems Indonesia Case Study (unpublished)
Kementerian Sosial RI and UNICEF/ Child Frontiers (2010)
Child & Family Welfare Services in Indonesia. An Assessment of the System for Prevention and Response to Abuse, Violence and Exploitation against Children
UNICEF Indonesia (2013) Mapping Child Protection Systems. A Consolidated Report of Findings in Six Target Provinces in Indonesia: Aceh, Central Java, East Java, East Nusa Tenggara, South Sulawesi, and West Sulawesi
UNICEF Indonesia (2014) UNICEF Child Protection Indonesia - SBA in context (presentation)
UNICEF Indonesia (2014) Documenting the Lessons Learned: The Child Friendly – Pesantren Programme, Garut District, West Java
Pusat Kajian Perlindungan Anak Universitas Indonesia PUSKAPA
Understanding Vulnerability: A Study on Situations that affect Family Separation and the Lives of Children in and out of Family Care (Research in DKI Jakarta, Central Java And South Sulawesi)
119
120
(2014)
UNICEF Indonesia (2014) Endline Knowledge, Attitude and Practice (KAP) Research on Violence against Women and Children in Papua, Indonesia
UNICEF Indonesia (no date) Child Protection Information Management Mapping: Towards a Data Surveillance System in Indonesia
APBN (2014) National Child Budgeting Analysis 2014 (presentation)
Committee on the Rights of the Child (2014)
Concluding observations on the combined third and fourth periodic reports of Indonesia, CRC/C/IDN/CO/3-4
BAPPENAS, Badan Perencanaan Pembangunan Nasional (2011)
Building a Social Protection System for Children in Indonesia. An Assessment on the Implementation of the Ministry of Social Affairs’ Social Assistance Program PKSA and Its Contribution to the Child Protection System
UNICEF Indonesia (2012) Justice for Children Reform in Indonesia
UNICEF Indonesia (2013) Child Protection Fact Sheet
Griffith University (2013) Developing Child Protection and Social Work in Indonesia. Research Review –Child Protection Interventions in Low to Middle Income Countries
Griffith University (2013) Developing Child Protection and Social Work in Indonesia. Area-Based Pilot Projects Implementation Plan and Evaluation Framework
UNICEF Indonesia (no date) Issue Briefs: The Significant of Child Protection Systems: Key Findings from a System Mapping Exercise in six provinces in Indonesia
Center for Child Protection, University of Indonesia (2013)
Knowledge, Attitudes and Behaviours on Violence Against Children, South Sulawesi Research Study, Final Report
University of Melbourne (2013) Safe and strong Schools: Supporting schools in Papua, Indonesia in their efforts to reduce the incidence of violence
USAID (2013) Evaluation of the Opportunities for Vulnerable Children Program, Indonesia
World Bank (2012) JSLU, JSPACA, PKSA Cash and In-kind Transfers for at-risk youth, the disabled, and vulnerable elderly,
China Agricultural University (2013)
Analytical Report for the Project “Development of Regional Costing Model to Estimate the Economic Burden of Child Maltreatment in the East Asia and Pacific Region”
National NGO Coalition for the Rights of the Child Monitoring (2012)
Alternative Report on the Third and Fourth Periodic Report of the Government of Indonesia to the Committee on the Rights of the Child (Covering the period from 1997 to 2012)
120
121
UNICEF Indonesia Country Programme
UNICEF Indonesia (2010) Summary Results Matrix: Government of Indonesia – UNICEF Country Programme, 2011 – 2015
UNICEF Indonesia (2014) Child Protection Multi Year Work Plan (MYWP) 2014-2015 based on revised Mid Term Review (MTR) April 2014
UNICEF Indonesia Intermediate Results 4.1.1, 4.1.2, 4.1.3, 4.1.4, 4.1.5, 4.2.1, 4.2.2, 4.3.1
Government of Indonesia and UNICEF (2013)
Government of Indonesia and UNICEF 2011-2015 Country Programme Action Plan (CPAP) Mid-Term Review Report
UNICEF Indonesia (2011) Indonesia Country programme document 2011-2015
Government of Indonesia and UNICEF (2013)
Government of Indonesia–UNICEF Mid Term Review: Assessment of Country Programme 2011-2015 Results Child Protection
Experiences from other countries
KPMG (2009) Evaluation Framework - Child and Family Services Reforms
Inter-agency Group on Child Protection Systems in sub-Saharan Africa (2012)
Strengthening Child Protection Systems in Sub - Saharan Africa. A working paper
Professor Eileen Munro (2010) The Munro Review of Child Protection Interim Report: The Child’s Journey
Professor Eileen Munro (2011) The Munro Review of Child Protection: Final Report A child-centred system
Tilda Goldberg Centre for Social Work and Social Care (2013)
Reclaiming Social Work? An Evaluation of Systemic Units as an Approach to Delivering Children‘s Services. Final report of a comparative study of practice and the factors shaping it in three local authorities
UK Government (2010) Working Together to Safeguard Children. A guide to inter-agency working to safeguard and promote the welfare of children
World Vision (2013) Evaluation Study of Child Protection Units (Albania)
Child protection systems working group (CPSWG) (2012)
Concept Note: Conference on Child Protection Systems Strengthening in Sub-Saharan Africa: Promising Practices, Lessons Learned and the Way Forward, Dakar, Senegal, 7-9 May
121
122
2012
Maestral International (2011) Child Protection Systems: Mapping And Assessing Eastern And Southern Africa
UNICEF (2013) Case Studies on UNICEF Programming in Child Protection
Consortium for Street Children (2005)
Child Protection Policies and Procedures Toolkit
122
123
Annex 6: Survey Results
Figure 14: Stakeholders surveyed about the relevance of the systems building approach
Figure 14 shows the results of a short survey that was administered to respondents that the evaluation team came into contact with through national, provincial and district meetings. The relevance of the systems building approach in Indonesia’s complex context resonated most with respondents at national level (>70%) and although less among the other respondents, still over 60% of provincial and over 50% district level respondents said it was relevant or very relevant. With such confusion about what the systems building approach consists of, however, it is likely that this question was interpreted by individual respondents based on their own diverse understandings of the systems building approach.
Figure 15: Stakeholders surveyed about the strengthening of the child protection system
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
All responses National level Sub‐national level(province)
District level
How relevant is the systems building approach to child protection in Indonesia’s complex context?
Very relevant
relevant
Neutral
Not very relevant
Not relevant
Stakeholder SurveyEvaluation of SBA in
Indonesia IOD PARC 2014
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%
100%
All responses National level Sub‐nationallevel (province)
District level
Has the CP system been strengthened as a result of efforts invested by government, UNICEF and other stakeholders in SBA?
Strengthened significantly
Some strengthening
Neutral
Very little
No strengthening has taken place
Stakeholder SurveyEvaluation of SBA in Indonesia IOD
PARC 2014
123
124
There was much more uncertainty among national respondents who responded to the survey about the extent to which the child protection system had been strengthened compared to sub national and district level respondents. One reason for this may be due to the practical manifestations of a child protection system which are more likely to be seen at district level which is the unit where services operate more frequently. 30% of national level respondents were affirmative that the child protection system had been strengthened compared to 70% of district level respondents.
Figure 16: Stakeholders surveyed about coordination and partnership
Less than five per cent of national level respondents who participated in the survey gave positive opinions about coordination efforts and mechanisms with 20% stating there was no useful coordination (Figure 16). There were more positive views at provincial and district levels, but the majority (nearly 70%) were neutral or pessimistic.
Figure 17: Stakeholders surveyed about the focus on the most vulnerable
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%
100%
All responses National level Sub‐nationallevel (province)
District level
Have CP coordination mechanisms and meaningful partnerships been developed as a result of efforts to build a system?
Excellent coordinationnow existsBetter coordination
Neutral
Very little
Stakeholder SurveyEvaluation of SBA in Indonesia IOD
PARC 2014
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%
100%
All responses National level Sub‐national level(province)
District level
Does the approach to building a CP system increase the focus on the most vulnerable children and families?
Significant increase infocus on most vulnerableSome increase
Neutral
Very little
Stakeholder SurveyEvaluation of SBA in Indonesia
IOD PARC 2014
124
125
Almost one third of national level respondents who took part in the survey thought that Indonesia was no further forward in developing models that are suitable for replication (Figure 18). Again at provincial and district levels, respondents were more optimistic but less than half thought that there was an increased number of models that could be replicated.
Figure 18: Stakeholders surveyed about models suitable for replication
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%
100%
All responses National level Sub‐national level(province)
District level
Has the approach to building a SP system increased the number of models that are appropriate for replication and scale up?
Yes there are manyexamplesSome examples
Neutral
Very few examples
There are no examplesthat can be replicated
Stakeholder SurveyEvaluation of SBA in Indonesia
IOD PARC 2014
125
126
126
127
Annex 7: Draft Roadmaps & Indicators
The indicators proposed here relate to the process of introducing a systems approach to developing a child protection system in Indonesia. A simple Theory of Change is presented for UNICEF’s child protection work is presented which includes a preliminary list of indicators.
The complexity of what UNICEF and the Government is intending to achieve through developing the national child protection system seems important to acknowledge in more detail. The development of the system as a whole necessarily informs UNICEF’s and the Government’s decisions about prioritisation which need to be seen within the larger picture. Therefore an extended consolidated list of indicators is also provided. This extended child protection system indicators list does not assume that all the components of a system are already in place and therefore some will need to be introduced, and at the same time it recognises that there are elements in place or in development that require strengthening.
The indicators focus on the key actors in the child protection response, and include references to wider sectors that have child protection relevance. However, comprehensive indicators have not been developed for these wider related sectors such as education, police and justice.
The ‘indicators’ should not be considered as prescriptive. They are intended to be discussion points, and could as easily be phrased as a question. For example, #1.There is a lead agency with primary responsibility for child welfare and protection, could be posed as “Should Indonesia’s Child Protection System have a lead agency with primary responsibility for child welfare and protection?”
The indicators are drawn from the evaluation of the systems building approach in Indonesia32 and wider sources such as the review of mappings of child protection systems in the East Asia and Pacific region33 in order to consider both Indonesia’s context and progress to date, and incorporate recent thinking on child protection systems in the region.
Diagrams for each of the areas of the child protection system indicators are referenced in the report of the evaluation of the systems building approach in Indonesia, and in the attached excel file for ease of viewing.
32 IOD PARC, Formative Evaluation of UNICEF’s Child Protection System Building Approach in Indonesia, 2015 (DRAFT)
33 ECPAT International, Plan International, Save the Children, UNICEF and World Vision, National Child Protection Systems in the East Asia and Pacific Region: A review and analysis of mappings and assessments, ECPAT International, Bangkok, 2014
127
128
DraftTheoryofChangeThe diagram below is proposed as a starting point for the development of a theory of change and corresponding indicators for monitoring and evaluation purposes
128
129
The indicators are divided in five sections:
A. Structures and mandates
Central and sub-national level structures
Local level structures
Specialised structures and institutions
Traditional or informal community leaders
B. Delivery of social welfare and child protection services
Shift from single issue to comprehensive systems
Balance between prevention and response services
Role of civil society in service delivery
Access to government social services
Community-based child welfare and protection
Role of community leaders
Expectations of communities for services
C. Human Resources and Capacity
Human resource capacity and training
Geographic distribution
Capacity of health, education and legal professionals
Capacity of volunteers, civil society, and communities in child protection
Professionalisation of social work
D. Financial resources
Calculating child protection expenditure
Public expenditure on social welfare
External funding
Government child protection budgeting
E. Legal and regulatory frameworks
129
130
DraftChildProtectionSystemM&EIndicators
A. Structures and mandates
Central and sub-national level structures
1. There is a lead agency with primary responsibility for child welfare and protection
2. Clear mandates and roles of dedicated agencies with children protection responsibilities
3. There is clarity of responsibility and coordination across ministries which allocate resources, make policy and implement services: thematic databases, guidance and procedures, and services at national level are coordinated at national level
4. Where the lead agency for child protection does not have primary responsibility for ALL aspects of child protection or the protection of children in all circumstances, mandates of ministries are well coordinated and clearly articulated, and relate to the broader contexts of child welfare and protection
5. Where a national or sub-national coordinating committee is established to promote vertical and horizontal collaboration and coordination, (typically across ministries of social welfare, education, health, labour justice, police, judiciary, labour and finance) its precise role and functions are clear
6. In the context of decentralised governance structures, there are lines of communication and cohesive coordination between central level bodies with responsibility for policy development and state management, and subnational levels with responsibility for service delivery
7. Operational procedures at the sub-district and village level articulate how to implement the provincial and/or district level legislation
Local level structures
8. Where formal structures and services at local level are established, they relate to the existing informal structures in communities, by either complementing them or filling an identified gap
9. Local level structures with responsibility for child welfare services also have a specific mandate and authority to receive reports or take action regarding children and families at risk
10. Local level structures with responsibility for promoting behaviour change and awareness raising in relation to the protection of children and accessing services have clear guidelines on how to adapt approaches to local contexts and with cultural sensitivity
11. Child protection is treated as a distinct sector (e.g. like health or education) requiring a designated department responsible for service delivery, rather than solely as a matter of inter-agency coordination and referral
130
131
12. Community level child protection committees or networks have been established to address any lack of formal child welfare services at local levels
13. Mechanisms and processes for reporting child protection incidents are strengthened and community members, including children, know how to use them
14. Community (including voluntary) structures at sub-district levels have clear mandates depending on the communities’ needs and the availability of formal services, whether they promote children’s rights, monitor the situations of children in their communities, make referrals to district authorities, or respond to incidences of child maltreatment
15. Community-based child protection mechanisms and structures are an integral part of the overall child protection strategy:
They are linked to formal structures
Their establishment and maintenance are allocated sufficient resources to replicate and sustain them where they are needed
Investment in them continually supports the development of knowledge and capacity to deal with complex cases in accordance with the law and the best interests of children
They access ongoing inputs from specialists and professional assessments from social workers
Investment strategies identify ways to address limited interest of community committees in child protection issues or competing priorities; and facilitate frequent meetings, active participation and function of committees
They are culturally appropriate
They are appropriate for girls and boys
Specialised structures and institutions
16. Specialised structures and institutions (e.g. tertiary level services) are established to respond to child violence, abuse, neglect and exploitation
17. Specialised structures and institutions have the resources and mandate to focus on both immediate, crisis-based interventions (as is often already the case in medico-legal services) and support for children and families subsequently post crisis (often services have very limited scope in this regard)
18. Specialised structures are appropriate for both girls and boys
19. Academic and vocational training institutes are key partners in the professionalization of social work and child protection expertise
131
132
Traditional or informal community leaders
20. Traditional or informal community leaders have well-defined roles for ensuring the well-being of families and children in their community
21. Their authority is recognised by the Constitution or by a decree
22. The role of community leaders is harnessed by the formal child protection system
132
133
In p
lace
Par
tial
ly in
pla
ce
Not
yet
in p
lace
Min
imu
m s
tan
dard
s fo
r re
side
nti
al c
are
faci
litie
sR
obu
st m
ech
anis
ms
for
mon
itor
ing
and
enfo
rcem
ent
of s
tan
dard
s
Tra
dit
ion
al
or
info
rma
l co
mm
un
ity
le
ad
ers
Wel
l-de
fin
ed r
oles
for
en
suri
ng
the
wel
l-be
ing
of f
amili
es a
nd
child
ren
in t
hei
r co
mm
un
ity
Au
thor
ity
is r
ecog
nis
ed b
y th
e C
onst
itu
tion
or
by a
dec
ree
Rol
e of
com
mu
nit
y le
ader
s is
har
nes
sed
by t
he
form
al s
yste
m
Ter
tiar
y se
rvic
es a
re e
stab
lish
ed f
or im
med
iate
, cr
isis
-bas
ed in
terv
enti
ons
Ade
quat
e sc
ope
to s
upp
ort
child
ren
an
d fa
mili
es p
ost
cris
is e
.g. a
fter
bei
ng
disc
har
ged
from
hos
pita
l
Spec
ialis
ed s
tru
ctu
res
are
appr
opri
ate
for
both
gi
rls
and
boys
Aca
dem
ic a
nd
voca
tion
al t
rain
ing
inst
itu
tes
are
key
part
ner
s in
th
e pr
ofes
sion
alis
atio
n o
f so
cial
w
ork
and
child
pro
tect
ion
exp
erti
seD
edic
ated
ch
ildre
n's
cou
rts
Ch
ild-s
ensi
tive
cou
rt e
nvi
ron
men
ts (
scre
ens
and
vide
o eq
uip
men
t)G
over
nm
ent-
run
res
iden
tial
car
e fa
cilit
ies
for
child
ren
in n
eed
of
prot
ecti
on
Loc
al s
tru
ctu
res
wh
ich
pro
mot
e aw
aren
ess
and
serv
ices
hav
e gu
idel
ines
on
ada
ptin
g ap
proa
ches
to
loca
l con
text
s
Loc
al le
vel a
gen
cies
res
pon
sibl
e fo
r ch
ild w
elfa
re s
ervi
ces
hav
e m
anda
te a
nd
auth
orit
y to
rec
eive
rep
orts
or
take
act
ion
re
gard
ing
child
ren
an
d fa
mili
es a
t ri
sk
Ope
rati
onal
pro
cedu
res
(su
b-di
stri
ct, v
illag
e le
vel)
art
icu
late
how
to
impl
emen
t th
e pr
ovin
cial
/ di
stri
ct le
vel l
egis
lati
on
Ch
ild p
rote
ctio
n is
con
side
red
a se
ctor
rat
her
th
an s
olel
y a
mat
ter
of in
ter-
agen
cy r
efer
ral a
nd
coor
din
atio
n
Soci
al s
ervi
ces
coor
din
atio
n c
entr
es (
foca
l poi
nts
for
rep
orti
ng
and
refe
rral
)So
cial
Wel
fare
Ser
vice
Cen
tres
(P
usp
elke
ssos
) pi
lots
at
sub-
dist
rict
leve
l foc
al p
oin
ts
Hos
pita
l-ba
sed
one-
stop
cri
sis
cen
tres
off
erin
g co
ordi
nat
ed
med
ical
, leg
al a
nd
cou
nse
llin
g se
rvic
es f
or c
hild
ren
an
d ad
ult
s af
fect
ed b
y vi
olen
ce
Spec
ialis
ed p
olic
e u
nit
s fo
r ch
ild v
icti
ms
of c
rim
es
Spec
ialis
ed p
olic
e u
nit
s fo
r ch
ild a
llege
d of
fen
ders
Coh
esiv
e an
d co
ordi
nat
ed m
anag
emen
t be
twee
n m
inis
trie
s w
ith
res
pon
sibi
litie
s fo
r ch
ild w
elfa
re a
nd
prot
ecti
on
Cle
ar r
espo
nsi
bilit
y fo
r al
loca
tion
of
budg
ets
Info
rmal
str
uct
ure
s ar
e in
pla
ce
Coh
esiv
e an
d co
ordi
nat
ed
man
agem
ent
betw
een
pol
icy
and
serv
ice
deliv
ery
Cle
ar
resp
onsi
bilt
y fo
r di
rect
ser
vice
de
liver
y
Cle
ar
resp
onsi
bilit
y fo
r po
licy
deve
lopm
ent,
co
ordi
nat
ion
an
dst
ate
man
agem
ent
Coh
esiv
e an
d co
ordi
nat
ed m
anag
emen
t be
twee
n m
inis
trie
s w
ith
res
pon
sibi
litie
s fo
r ch
ild w
elfa
re a
nd
prot
ecti
on (
them
atic
da
taba
ses,
gu
idan
ce a
nd
proc
edu
res,
an
d se
rvic
es a
t n
atio
nal
leve
l are
coo
rdin
ated
)
Na
tio
na
l co
ord
ina
tin
g co
mm
itte
e o
r m
ech
an
ism
Pre
cise
rol
e an
d fu
nct
ion
s of
com
mit
tees
are
cl
ear
Coo
rdin
atio
n b
etw
een
sec
tors
is e
ffec
tive
Lea
d a
gen
cy w
ith
pri
ma
ry r
esp
on
sib
ilit
y
for
chil
d w
elfa
re a
nd
pro
tect
ion
Man
date
s an
d ro
les
of m
ult
iple
ded
icat
ed
agen
cies
are
cle
ar
Str
uct
ure
s a
nd
ma
nd
ate
s
Cen
tra
l le
vel
Su
b-n
ati
on
al
lev
els
For
mal
str
uct
ure
s ar
e in
pla
ce
Su
b-n
ati
on
al
coo
rdin
ati
ng
com
mit
tee
or
mec
ha
nis
ms
Pre
cise
rol
e an
d fu
nct
ion
s of
com
mit
tees
are
cl
ear
Coo
rdin
atio
n b
etw
een
sec
tors
is e
ffec
tive
Lo
cal
lev
el s
tru
ctu
res
For
mal
str
uct
ure
s an
d se
rvic
es a
t lo
cal l
evel
rel
ate
to e
xist
ing
info
rnal
str
uct
ure
s in
com
mu
nit
ies
Com
mu
nit
y le
vel c
hild
pro
tect
ion
com
mit
tees
or
net
wor
ks h
ave
been
est
ablis
hed
to
addr
ess
the
lack
of
form
al c
hild
wel
fare
se
rvic
es a
t lo
cal l
evel
s
Mec
han
ism
s an
d pr
oces
ses
for
repo
rtin
g ch
ild p
rote
ctio
n
inci
den
ts a
re s
tren
gth
ened
an
d co
mm
un
ity
mem
bers
, in
clu
din
g ch
ildre
n, k
now
how
to
use
th
em
Ch
alle
nge
s w
ith
su
stai
nab
ility
an
d re
sou
rces
of
com
mu
nit
y-ba
sed
mec
han
ism
s ar
e u
nde
rsto
od a
nd
addr
esse
d
Sp
ecia
lise
d s
tru
ctu
res
an
d i
nst
itu
tio
ns
133
134
B.Delivery of social welfare and child protection services
Shift from single issue to comprehensive systems
23. Commitment to move from individual issues-based response to holistic, integrated approach
24. Macro structural reforms towards more holistic and integrated approach to child welfare and protection in place of issue-specific approaches which requires:
Considerable time for gaining approvals and implementation
Establishing much greater cooperation among ministries with current responsibility for specific issues
Joint working between ministries to develop a common vision of a system
Establishing increased synergy within the ministry responsible for social welfare when there are specialised departments that need to be working in alignment with each other
Balance between prevention and response services
Prevention services
25. Child welfare and protection is linked to the achievement of MDGs indicating commitment to a broader and more holistic response
26. Social protection schemes are child-sensitive: they are designed to bring families out of poverty, to protect them in times of family or economic crisis, and to ensure that the basic needs of children are met
27. Child-sensitive social protection schemes are harmonised at national level with other welfare and protection strategies, limited numbers of social workers are not diverted to solely supplying financial assistance to families
28. Awareness raising initiatives (to explain new laws or services) are appropriately implemented and context-specific
Family services
29. Quality and tailored services for families are part of the child protection system, i.e. help for families that are experiencing difficulties rather than necessarily in crisis
134
135
30. Short term measures such as material assistance and education scholarships are complemented with support that has longer term outcomes in relation to protecting children from violence abuse and exploitation
Response services
31. Response services are simplified, and do not risk paralysis because of overly complex and bureaucratic procedures, referral pathways, case management mechanisms and the monitoring of care services, yet still provide an elevated level of protection to children
32. Health practitioners are trained to detect and treat child victims of abuse and neglect and are mandated to provide medical care
33. Specialised police units conduct forensic investigations and pursue prosecution of the alleged offender
34. Specialised police or legal units provide legal advice to victims and their families
35. Specialised police units focus specifically on violence against women and children
36. Social welfare agencies provide a range of continued support services for children and their families
37. Human and financial resources are available to establish tailored care plans and manage the recovery of victims
38. Professionals have realistic and workable guidance for working with children and their families, which are culturally, contextually and gender appropriate
39. Government social workers have the training and resources to implement the protocols and standards that are supposed to guide their decision making, make appropriate referrals and follow up monitoring
40. Communities and families (including children) regard response services as appropriate and accessible
Role of civil society in service delivery
41. The role of NGOs and private organisations in filling service gaps is recognised and incorporated into the national strategy
42. NGOs and private organisations engaged in child protection services are regulated, and adhere to government policy and standards
43. NGOs (and private organisations) and government services are clearly defined and do not duplicate each other
Access to government social services
44. Communities have positive perceptions about the effectiveness and reliability of government services
135
136
45. Services that are readily available in urban areas are replicated or substituted with appropriate levels of support at local levels and in rural areas (e.g. community-based para-social workers)
46. Service providers that need to travel to more remote or rural areas have the resources to do so and where necessary support clients to travel to services, without being expected to fund transport out of their own salaries
47. Where communities are isolated from regular government services (by lack of transport or difficult to navigate terrain), alternative arrangements are in place, such as a cadre of peripatetic or visiting professionals
48. The safety of social workers is not compromised and provision in place for services to respond to potentially hostile situations with additional support
49. Cultural factors and social norms that determine whether families, communities and children access services voluntarily are well understood, and services are designed to mitigate the factors that deter access
Community-based child welfare and protection
50. The factors in communities that prevent or discourage intervention in a situation of abuse or exploitation or reporting abuse are understood and strategies are in place to address these
Role of community leaders
51. The authority and actions of community leaders, for example in promoting community harmony or reliance on resolution mechanisms such as financial restitution, do not conflict with responding to the welfare needs of children
52. There is clear guidance on who determines the ‘best interests’ of the child in community structures that respond to child protection issues
53. Formal and informal structures explore and address the reasons for tacit condoning of harmful practices and situations for children (e.g. hazardous labour or prostitution)
54. Alternative routes for reporting and responding to abuse and exploitation are known and accessible when community leaders are responsible for perpetrating violence
Expectations of communities for services
55. Families and communities perceive formal systems and services as:
Fair, effective and efficient
Working in conjunction with customary law
As simple and inexpensive to access
136
137
Relevant to the realities of people’s lives and the types of resources and the capacity required to ensure meaningful and quality services
As trustworthy (upholding confidentiality and privacy)
Providing a wide range of responses rather than a last resort if local or informal restitution mechanisms have not been fulfilled
Mechanisms for responding to abuse and exploitation rather than designating incidents as a ‘family matter’
As providing help and improving a situation rather than making things worse e.g. by further stigmatising a child victim
137
138
In p
lace
Par
tial
ly in
pla
ce
Not
yet
in p
lace
Spec
ialis
ed p
olic
e u
nit
s co
ndu
ct f
oren
sic
inve
stig
atio
ns
and
purs
ue
pros
ecu
tion
of
the
alle
ged
offe
nde
r
Soci
al w
elfa
re a
gen
cies
pro
vide
a r
ange
of
con
tin
ued
su
ppor
t se
rvic
es f
or c
hild
ren
an
d f
amili
es
Pro
fess
ion
als
hav
e re
alis
tic
and
wor
kabl
e gu
idan
ce f
or
wor
kin
g w
ith
ch
ildre
n a
nd
thei
r fa
mili
es
Com
mu
nit
ies
and
fam
ilies
reg
ard
resp
onse
ser
vice
s as
ap
prop
riat
e an
d ac
cess
ible
Ba
lan
ce b
etw
een
pre
ven
tio
n a
nd
re
spo
nse
ser
vic
es
Res
pon
se s
ervi
ces
are
sim
plif
ied
but
still
pro
vide
ele
vate
d le
vel o
f pr
otec
tion
Spec
ialis
ed p
olic
e u
nit
s fo
cus
on v
iole
nce
aga
inst
wom
en
and
child
ren
Hu
man
an
d fi
nan
cial
res
ourc
es a
re a
vaila
ble
to e
stab
lish
ta
ilore
d ca
re p
lan
s an
d m
anag
e th
e re
cove
ry o
f vi
ctim
s
Gov
ern
men
t so
cial
wor
kers
are
abl
e to
impl
emen
t th
e pr
otoc
ols
and
stan
dard
s th
at a
re s
upp
osed
to
guid
e th
eir
deci
sion
mak
ing,
mak
e ap
prop
riat
e re
ferr
als
and
follo
w u
p m
onit
orin
g
Res
po
nse
ser
vic
es
Hea
lth
pra
ctit
ion
ers
are
trai
ned
to
dete
ct a
nd
trea
t ch
ild
vict
ims
of a
buse
an
d n
egle
ct a
nd
man
date
d to
pro
vide
m
edic
al c
are
Spec
ialis
ed p
olic
e u
nit
s pr
ovid
e le
gal a
dvic
e to
vic
tim
s an
d th
eir
fam
ilies
Co
mm
un
ity
-ba
sed
ch
ild
wel
fare
an
d
pro
tect
ion
Fac
tors
in c
omm
un
itie
s th
at p
reve
nt
or
disc
oura
ge in
terv
enti
on a
re u
nde
rsto
odSt
rate
gies
are
in p
lace
to
addr
ess
fact
ors
that
pr
even
t in
terv
enti
on
Ro
le o
f ci
vil
so
ciet
y i
n s
erv
ice
del
iver
y
NG
Os'
rol
e in
fill
ing
serv
ice
gaps
is r
ecog
nis
ed
and
inco
rpor
ated
into
th
e n
atio
nal
str
ateg
y
NG
Os
enga
ged
in c
hild
pro
tect
ion
ser
vice
s ar
e re
gula
ted,
an
d ad
her
e to
gov
ern
men
t po
licy
and
stan
dard
s
NG
Os
and
gove
rnm
ent
serv
ices
are
cle
arly
de
fin
ed a
nd
do n
ot d
upl
icat
e ea
ch o
ther
Sh
ift
fro
m s
ingl
e is
sue
to c
om
pre
hen
siv
e sy
stem
s
Acc
ess
to g
ov
ern
men
t so
cia
l se
rvic
es
Com
mu
nit
ies
hav
e po
siti
ve p
erce
ptio
ns
abou
t th
e ef
fect
iven
ess
and
relia
bilit
y of
gov
ern
men
t se
rvic
es
De
liv
ery
of
soci
al
we
lfa
re a
nd
ch
ild
p
rote
ctio
n s
erv
ice
s
Fa
mil
y s
erv
ices
Shor
t te
rm m
easu
res
(pra
ctic
al, i
mm
edia
te, f
inan
cial
) ar
e co
mpl
emen
ted
by s
upp
ort
wh
ich
has
lon
ger
term
ou
tcom
es f
or p
rote
ctio
n
Com
mit
men
t to
mov
e fr
om in
divi
dual
issu
es-
base
d re
spon
se t
o h
olis
tic,
inte
grat
ed a
ppro
ach
Stru
ctu
ral r
efor
ms
tow
ards
mor
e h
olis
tic
and
inte
grat
ed a
ppro
ach
to
child
wel
fare
an
d pr
otec
tion
bet
wee
n a
nd
wit
hin
min
istr
ies
Stra
tegi
es/s
ervi
ces
are
desi
gned
to
addr
ess
the
sou
rce
of v
uln
erab
iliti
es
Pre
ven
tio
n s
erv
ices
Ch
ild w
elfa
re a
nd
prot
ecti
on is
lin
ked
to t
he
ach
ieve
men
t of
MD
Gs
Soci
al p
rote
ctio
n s
chem
es a
re c
hild
-sen
siti
ve
Aw
aren
ess
rais
ing
init
iati
ves
(to
expl
ain
new
law
s or
se
rvic
es)
are
appr
opri
atel
y im
plem
ente
d an
d co
nte
xt-
spec
ific
Qu
alit
y an
d ta
ilore
d se
rvic
es f
or f
amili
es a
re p
art
of t
he
child
pro
tect
ion
sys
tem
Ch
ild-s
ensi
tive
soc
ial p
rote
ctio
n is
har
mon
ised
at
nat
ion
al
leve
l
Ex
pec
tati
on
s o
f co
mm
un
itie
s fo
r se
rvic
esF
amili
es a
nd
com
mu
nit
ies
perc
eive
fo
rmal
sys
tem
s an
d se
rvic
es a
s:
Fai
r, e
ffec
tive
an
d ef
fici
ent
Wor
kin
g in
con
jun
ctio
n w
ith
cu
stom
ary
law
As
sim
ple
and
inex
pen
sive
to
acce
ss
Ro
le o
f co
mm
un
ity
lea
der
s
Th
e au
thor
ity
and
acti
ons
of c
omm
un
ity
lead
ers
do n
ot c
onfl
ict
wit
h r
espo
ndi
ng
to t
he
wel
fare
nee
ds o
f ch
ildre
n
Cle
ar g
uid
ance
on
wh
o de
term
ines
th
e ‘b
est
inte
rest
s’ o
f th
e ch
ild
Serv
ices
ava
ilabl
e in
urb
an a
reas
are
rep
licat
ed
or s
ubs
titu
ted
in r
ura
l are
asSe
rvic
e pr
ovid
ers
hav
e th
e re
sou
rces
to
trav
el
to r
ura
l or
rem
ote
area
sIs
olat
ed c
omm
un
itie
s ge
t al
tern
ativ
e se
rvic
es
e.g.
per
ipat
etic
/ vi
siti
ng
Th
e sa
fety
of
soci
al w
orke
rs is
not
co
mpr
omis
edSe
rvic
es a
re d
esig
ned
to
mit
igat
e cu
ltu
ral
fact
ors
& s
ocia
l nor
ms
that
det
er a
cces
s
As
prov
idin
g h
elp,
impr
ovin
g a
situ
atio
n r
ath
er c
ausi
ng
har
m
For
mal
an
d in
form
al s
tru
ctu
res
expl
ore
and
addr
ess
the
reas
ons
for
taci
t co
ndo
nin
g of
h
arm
ful p
ract
ices
an
d si
tuat
ion
s fo
r ch
ildre
n
Alt
ern
ativ
e ro
ute
s fo
r re
port
ing
and
resp
ondi
ng
to a
buse
are
kn
own
an
d ac
cess
ible
wh
en
com
mu
nit
y le
ader
s ar
e re
spon
sibl
e fo
r pe
rpet
rati
ng
viol
ence
Mec
han
ism
s fo
r re
spon
din
g to
abu
se
rath
er t
han
des
ign
atin
g in
cide
nts
as
a‘fa
mily
mat
ter’
Rel
evan
t to
th
eir
real
itie
s
As
tru
stw
orth
y (u
phol
din
g co
nfi
den
tial
ity
and
priv
acy)
Pro
vidi
ng
a w
ide
ran
ge o
f re
spon
ses
rath
er t
han
a la
st r
esor
t
138
139
C.Human Resources and Capacity 56. An accurate calculation can be made of the human resources available to the system: both
formal and informal actors with a child protection role, and the numbers of staff from other sectors (e.g. education, health and police) who may interact with children in need of assistance
Human resource capacity and training
57. There are sufficient numbers of professionally trained social welfare staff
Sufficient to implement and deliver the services in the child protection system strategy
Sufficient to meet the needs of the population i.e. ratios of staff to population is adequate
58. Local level social welfare teams and individuals who have a generic social welfare role are joined by or have access to staff who specialise in child protection
59. Actual number of cases that child protection staff handle per year is monitored to determine whether additional staff are needed or not
60. Technical officials who have a role in implementing the laws have an understanding of child protection and child protection legislation. This includes police, judges, lawyers, teachers, health workers, staff in children’s institutions or residential homes and detention centre staff as well as those with responsibility for developing and delivering social welfare programmes and services.
61. The number of positions and level of compensation of public sector employees, including teachers, medical staff and social welfare/child protection workers are protected in the context of post-financial crisis austerity to ensure the quality of social services and avoid absenteeism, informal fees and brain drain
Geographic distribution
62. Geographic distribution of social welfare staff is even and/or on the basis of need (e.g. population or poverty levels)
63. Strategies are in place to address the bias towards social welfare staff being placed in urban centres
64. Staff working in rural areas are adequately trained, supported and supervised
65. Frequent rotation of social welfare staff which impacts on the quality, consistency and availability of services, and relationships with communities, is mitigated through measures
139
140
such as ongoing investment in training and handovers between staff to maintain continuity of community relations
Capacity of health, education and legal professionals
66. The roles of other ministries and sectors in the child protection system are recognised and acknowledged
67. Training is provided for teachers, police and health care workers which increases their understanding of child protection, children’s rights, and legal obligations under the law to report
68. Child protection training for professionals in these sectors is part of ongoing professional development capacity building initiatives
69. Child protection training for professionals in these sectors is incorporated into the mainstream curricula of academic and vocational training institutions
70. Within the justice sector professionals (police, prosecutors, judges, magistrates, probation officers etc.) are trained in child protection:
Police are trained in child and gender-sensitive investigative and referral procedures for police specialists
Training is incorporated into the police academy training
Frequent rotation of personnel is mitigated by ongoing investment in training and instituting child-sensitive processes and mechanisms internally
Capacity of volunteers, civil society, and communities in child protection
71. The roles and expectations of volunteer and community human resources are clearly defined and articulated as part of the overall strategy or system of child protection
72. Appropriate levels of resources are agreed and allocated to supporting volunteers and community human resources (e.g. training and capacity building, financial resources to establish networks, recompense depending on the nature of the work)
73. Training for volunteer and community structures includes a balance of raising awareness of children’s rights and national laws, and providing direct services and assistance to families and children
74. Volunteers provide quality, focussed assistance and are not requested to support the work of multiple ministries which stretches them too widely
140
141
Professionalization of social work
75. Strategies that aim to reduce child maltreatment through responses by social workers and other professional cadres, have the critical resource allocation meet the capacity needs of the child and family welfare system (so that social workers have the skills and time availability to work effectively with families and children)
76. There are specialised schools of social work and community development
77. Universities promote and provide social work education to meet the needs of the national social work vision
78. Professional social work associations are established and accredit university courses as appropriate
79. Social work is perceived in a broader context of professionalism than solely a voluntary or community endeavour
80. The role of professional social workers in the government system once they are trained is clear
81. Curriculums for training social workers are tailored and applicable to Indonesia’s diverse contexts
82. The role of social workers and their approaches to working with families and communities are acceptable (to the communities) and viewed as beneficial to the population, to ensure their roles are culturally congruent
83. External donor funded initiatives to develop the social welfare sector through increasing professional capacity are designed and implemented in close coordination with national government to ensure the system is appropriately resourced and prepared to absorb and effectively utilise the skills of social workers once trained
84. The government tracks who has received what type of training by which organisation or institution to determine overall capacity to inform development plans
141
142
In p
lace
Par
tial
ly in
pla
ce
Not
yet
in p
lace
Vol
un
teer
s pr
ovid
e qu
alit
y,
focu
ssed
ass
ista
nce
an
d ar
e n
ot
over
stre
tch
ed
Th
e ro
les
of o
ther
min
istr
ies
and
sect
ors
in t
he
syst
em a
re
reco
gnis
ed
Tra
inin
g is
pro
vide
d fo
r te
ach
ers,
po
lice
and
hea
lth
car
e w
orke
rsSt
aff
in r
ura
l are
as a
re a
dequ
atel
y tr
ain
ed, s
upp
orte
d an
d su
perv
ised
Tec
hn
ical
off
icia
ls w
ho
hav
e a
role
in
impl
emen
tin
g th
e la
ws
hav
e an
u
nde
rsta
ndi
ng
of c
hild
pro
tect
ion
an
d ch
ild p
rote
ctio
n le
gisl
atio
n
Th
e go
vern
men
t tr
acks
wh
o h
as
rece
ived
tra
inin
g
Cu
rric
ulu
ms
for
trai
nin
g so
cial
w
orke
rs a
re t
ailo
red
and
appl
icab
le
to I
ndo
nes
ia’s
div
erse
con
text
s
Ext
ern
al d
onor
fu
nde
d in
itia
tive
s al
ign
wit
h n
atio
nal
gov
ern
men
t re
sou
rce
and
capa
city
nee
ds
Rol
e of
pro
fess
ion
al s
ocia
l wor
kers
on
ce t
hey
are
tra
ined
is c
lear
Th
e ro
le o
f so
cial
wor
kers
an
d th
eir
appr
oach
es t
o w
orki
ng
wit
h
fam
ilies
an
d co
mm
un
itie
s ar
e ac
cept
able
(to
th
e co
mm
un
itie
s)
Pro
fess
ion
ali
sati
on
of
soci
al
wo
rk
Pro
fess
ion
al s
ocia
l wor
k as
soci
atio
ns
are
esta
blis
hed
an
d ac
cred
it u
niv
ersi
ty c
ours
es a
s ap
prop
riat
e
Th
e ro
les
and
expe
ctat
ion
s of
vo
lun
teer
an
d co
mm
un
ity
hu
man
re
sou
rces
are
cle
arly
def
ined
App
ropr
iate
leve
ls o
f re
sou
rces
are
ag
reed
an
d al
loca
ted
to s
upp
orti
ng
volu
nte
ers
and
com
mu
nit
y h
um
anre
sou
rces
Stra
tegi
es o
f so
cial
wor
kers
an
d ot
her
pro
fess
ion
al c
adre
s h
ave
the
reso
urc
e al
loca
tion
to
mee
t th
e ca
paci
ty n
eeds
of
the
child
an
d fa
mily
wel
fare
sys
tem
Th
ere
are
spec
ialis
ed s
choo
ls o
f so
cial
wor
k an
d co
mm
un
ity
deve
lopm
ent
Un
iver
siti
es p
rovi
de e
duca
tion
to
mee
t th
e n
eeds
of
the
nat
ion
al
visi
on
Ca
pa
city
of
vo
lun
teer
s, c
ivil
so
ciet
y,
& c
om
mu
nit
ies
Soci
al w
ork
is p
erce
ived
in a
br
oade
r co
nte
xt o
f pr
ofes
sion
alis
m
Tra
inin
g fo
r vo
lun
teer
an
d co
mm
un
ity
stru
ctu
res
incl
ude
s a
bala
nce
of
rais
ing
awar
enes
s of
ri
ghts
an
d la
ws,
an
d pr
ovid
ing
dire
ct a
ssis
tan
ce
Ch
ild p
rote
ctio
n t
rain
ing
for
prof
essi
onal
s in
oth
er s
ecto
rs is
pa
rt o
f on
goin
g pr
ofes
sion
al
deve
lopm
ent
Suff
icie
nt
to im
plem
ent
and
deliv
er t
he
serv
ices
in t
he
child
pro
tect
ion
sys
tem
st
rate
gy
Loc
al le
vel s
ocia
l act
ors
wh
o h
ave
a ge
ner
ic s
ocia
l wel
fare
rol
e w
ork
wit
h s
taff
wh
o sp
ecia
lise
in c
hild
pr
otec
tion
Geo
grap
hic
dis
trib
uti
on o
f so
cial
w
elfa
re s
taff
is e
ven
an
d/or
on
th
e ba
sis
of n
eed
Stra
tegi
es a
ddre
ss b
ias
tow
ards
so
cial
wel
fare
in u
rban
cen
tres
Act
ual
nu
mbe
r of
cas
es t
hat
ch
ild
prot
ecti
on s
taff
han
dle
per
year
is
mon
itor
ed t
o de
term
ine
staf
fin
g n
eeds
Suff
icie
nt
to m
eet
the
nee
ds
of t
he
popu
lati
on i.
e. r
atio
s of
sta
ff t
o po
pula
tion
is
adeq
uat
e
Hu
ma
n r
eso
urc
e ca
pa
city
an
d
tra
inin
gG
eogr
ap
hic
dis
trib
uti
on
Ca
pa
city
of
hea
lth
, ed
uca
tio
n
an
d l
ega
l p
rofe
ssio
na
ls
Hu
ma
n R
eso
urc
es
an
d C
ap
aci
ty
Acc
ura
te c
alcu
lati
on c
an b
e m
ade
of t
he
hu
man
res
ourc
es a
vaila
ble
to t
he
syst
em
Th
ere
are
suff
icie
nt
nu
mbe
rs o
f pr
ofes
sion
ally
tra
ined
soc
ial
wel
fare
sta
ff
Wit
hin
th
e ju
stic
e se
ctor
pr
ofes
sion
als
are
trai
ned
:T
rain
ing
is in
corp
orat
ed in
to t
he
polic
e ac
adem
y tr
ain
ing
Pol
ice
are
trai
ned
in c
hild
an
d ge
nde
r-se
nsi
tive
inve
stig
ativ
e an
d re
ferr
al p
roce
dure
s fo
r po
lice
spec
ialis
ts
Tra
inin
g fo
r pr
ofes
sion
als
is
inco
rpor
ated
into
cu
rric
ula
of
acad
emic
an
d vo
cati
onal
tra
inin
g
Impa
cts
of f
requ
ent
rota
tion
of
soci
al w
elfa
re s
taff
is m
itig
ated
Pu
blic
sec
tor
post
s an
d sa
lari
es a
re
prot
ecte
d in
th
e co
nte
xt o
f po
st-
fin
anci
al c
risi
s au
ster
ity
to e
nsu
re
the
qual
ity
of s
ocia
l ser
vice
s
Fre
quen
t ro
tati
on o
f pe
rson
nel
is
mit
igat
ed
142
143
D. Financial resources 85. There are sufficient dedicated resources in place for child protection to implement the laws
and regulations including delivery of services
Calculating child protection expenditure
86. The total amount of funds available for strengthening of families and the protection of children is known in order to assess the functionality and sustainability of the national child protection system:
It is clear what is included in the child protection budget: expenditures, infrastructure and services spread across a range of agencies and tiers of government including social welfare, justice, security, health, labour, social protection and early childhood development
There is a single source that provides complete and accountable information relating to the budget and the budgetary process to identify child protection resources
It is clear whether funding for services funded by different ministries are classified under the child protection budget or other budget
It is clear whether funding for specific issues (e.g. child trafficking or child labour) are classified under the child protection or other budget
Within child protection expenditure, disaggregation shows allocation to salaries, training, infrastructure, administration, residential care, and direct welfare and protection services to children and families
Public expenditure on social welfare
87. There is a target to increase spending on social welfare to meet national and sub-national child protection resource needs
88. Formal child-sensitive social protection mechanisms address gaps caused by the demise of traditional community-based social protection systems and community networks due to e.g. increased urbanisation and other dynamic context changes
89. The cost-effectiveness of investing in early prevention through strengthening of child and family welfare systems is calculated
External funding
90. Government departments assess the levels of external funding they receive for child protection and identify the types of activities that are reliant on donor contributions to identify dependency risks and uneven expenditure
143
144
91. The government is able to assess the level of external funding for child protection that does not flow through it i.e. services and support provided by NGOs or private institutions
92. There is a system of compiling information about multiple funding streams supporting different programmes implemented by government departments and NGOs in order to coordinate annual budgeting
93. External funding for child protection is clearly tracked with strategies in place to mitigate the risk of a sudden withdrawal of finance and reduce dependence in the long term
Government child protection budgeting
94. The government has adequate expertise in child protection budgeting at central and sub-national levels as appropriate
95. Subnational authorities subscribe to the concept of child-friendly/ child-sensitive budgeting and channel resources to programmes targeting children, women and poor families
96. Government departments are able to report on how much of their budget is allocated and spent on child protection including within larger budgets for children, families and social welfare
97. The ministry of finance has a comprehensive picture of funds that flow through it, and can disaggregate external donor funds
98. The ministry of finance has a system or process for developing annual work plans or budgets that consolidate both national finances and those provided by development partners, allowing the ministry to identify potential funding overlaps or other inefficiencies
144
145
In p
lace
Par
tial
ly in
pla
ce
Not
yet
in p
lace
It is
cle
ar w
het
her
fu
ndi
ng
for
spec
ific
is
sues
are
cla
ssif
ied
as c
hild
pro
tect
ion
Exp
endi
ture
is d
iagg
rega
ted
(sal
arie
s,
trai
nin
g, in
fras
tru
ctu
re, a
dmin
istr
atio
n,
resi
den
tial
car
e, a
nd
dire
ct s
ervi
ces
etc)
Gov
ern
men
t de
part
men
ts a
sses
s th
e le
vels
of
expe
ndi
ture
fu
nde
d ex
tern
ally
Cla
rity
wh
ich
ser
vice
s fu
nde
d by
all
min
istr
ies
are
clas
sifi
ed c
hild
pro
tect
ion
Go
ver
nm
ent
chil
d p
rote
ctio
n
bu
dge
tin
g
Th
e to
tal a
mou
nt
of f
un
ds a
vaila
ble
for
stre
ngt
hen
ing
of f
amili
es a
nd
the
prot
ecti
on o
f ch
ildre
n is
kn
own
Th
ere
is a
sys
tem
of
com
pilin
g in
form
atio
n a
bou
t m
ult
iple
fu
ndi
ng
stre
ams
to c
oord
inat
e an
nu
al b
udg
etin
g
Subn
atio
nal
au
thor
itie
s ad
opt
child
-fr
ien
dly/
ch
ild-s
ensi
tive
bu
dget
ing
Stra
tegi
es t
o re
plac
e ex
tern
al f
un
din
g fo
r ch
ild p
rote
ctio
n a
re in
pla
ce in
sh
ort
and
lon
g te
rm
A s
ingl
e so
urc
e pr
ovid
es c
ompl
ete
info
rmat
ion
rel
atin
g to
th
e bu
dget
an
d th
e bu
dget
ary
proc
ess
Th
e go
vern
men
t h
as a
dequ
ate
expe
rtis
e in
ch
ild p
rote
ctio
n
budg
etin
g at
cen
tral
an
d su
b-n
atio
nal
leve
ls
Gov
ern
men
t de
part
men
ts a
re a
ble
to r
epor
t on
how
mu
ch o
f th
eir
budg
et is
allo
cate
d an
d sp
ent
on
child
pro
tect
ion
Th
e m
inis
try
of f
inan
ce h
as a
co
mpr
ehen
sive
pic
ture
of
fun
ds
that
flo
w t
hro
ugh
it, a
nd
can
di
sagg
rega
te e
xter
nal
don
or f
un
ds
Th
e m
inis
try
of f
inan
ce h
as a
sy
stem
or
proc
ess
for
deve
lopi
ng
ann
ual
wor
k pl
ans
or b
udg
ets
that
co
nso
lidat
e bo
th n
atio
nal
an
d ex
tern
al f
un
din
g
Fin
an
cia
l re
sou
rce
s
Ca
lcu
lati
ng
chil
d p
rote
ctio
n
exp
end
itu
reP
ub
lic
exp
end
itu
re o
n s
oci
al
wel
fare
Ex
tern
al
fun
din
g
Gov
ern
men
t kn
ows
the
amou
nt
of
exte
rnal
fu
ndi
ng
for
child
pro
tect
ion
th
at
does
not
flo
w t
hro
ugh
itC
lari
ty w
hat
is in
clu
ded
in t
he
child
pr
otec
tion
bu
dget
(ex
pen
ditu
res,
in
fras
tru
ctu
re a
nd
serv
ices
acr
oss
agen
cies
an
d ti
ers
of g
over
nm
ent)
Th
ere
are
suff
icie
nt
dedi
cate
d re
sou
rces
in
plac
e fo
r ch
ild p
rote
ctio
n t
o im
plem
ent
the
law
s an
d re
gula
tion
s in
clu
din
g de
liver
y of
se
rvic
es
A t
arge
t to
incr
ease
soc
ial w
elfa
re
spen
din
g to
mee
t ch
ild p
rote
ctio
n
reso
urc
e n
eeds
For
mal
ch
ild-s
ensi
tive
soc
ial p
rote
ctio
n
mec
han
ism
s ad
dres
s ga
psT
he
cost
-eff
ecti
ven
ess
of in
vest
ing
in
earl
y pr
even
tion
is c
alcu
late
d
145
146
E.Legal and regulatory frameworks 99. The legal framework (laws and policies) perform dual functions:
Prohibits all forms of violence, abuse and exploitation of children
Describes the delivery of prevention and response (welfare and justice) to children and families
100.Laws recognise children’s rights to protection and contain detailed provisions on the authority for child protection and processes and procedures for intervening to protect a child
101.Laws are framed in rights-based language and include a statement of children’s rights
102. Laws incorporate CRC guiding principles such as the best interests of the child, non-discrimination, child participation and respect for their views in decision making
103. Laws articulate the responsibility of parents in regard to the welfare of children and the State’s obligation to protection children from all forms of violence, abuse, neglect and exploitation
104. Laws include statutory provisions making it mandatory to report any known or suspected incidents of child maltreatment to the police or child welfare authority
105. Laws outline the authority and procedures for intervention by the child protection authority to prevent or respond to children at risk, including emergency powers to take children into custody were they are imminent risk as well as a process for investigation and decision making around care planning and protective interventions
106. Laws specify who is to take action and how decisions are to be made, including legislated procedures for receiving and responding to concerns about children at risk or in need of protection
107.Laws include clear, standardised procedures for a child’s progress through the child protection system and detailed guidance on the criteria, procedures and minimum standards for locating, assessment, referral, care planning, monitoring and record keeping
108. Laws give the child welfare agency the responsibility to receive and investigate concerns about children in need of protection and to apply to the court for a protection order where necessary
109. Laws that were founded on a model of crisis intervention and response, which limit parental rights under family or civil law are transposed from a response to parental misconduct to one that focusses on the needs of a child and is linked to the child protection laws or child protection agency policies; provision is made for less invasive interventions aimed at strengthening parents’ ability to care for and protect their children
146
147
110.Protection measures for children are contained in the overall child protection law rather than scattered across multiple issue-specific laws, policies and national plans of action: if these laws require specific support services and protective measures only for children who fall within the category of harm that the law addresses.34
111. Minimum standards for child protection services are clear and enforceable, rather than non-binding
112. Laws articulate a clear requirement for registration, accreditation and monitoring of all agencies providing child protection services
113. There is sufficient awareness of the laws and policies among those required to implement or adhere to them
114. There are appropriate human resources in place to implement or adhere to laws and policies
115. There are appropriate financial resources in place to implement or adhere to laws and policies
116. The laws and policies are realistic and appropriate in the national context and culture
34 In Indonesia, physical or sexual violence suffered by a child perpetrated by a family member would fall under the Domestic Violence Law and the child would be entitled to specified services and protections. But those services would not be available to a child who had suffered physical or sexual violence by someone not related to him/her.
147
148
In p
lace
Par
tial
ly in
pla
ce
Not
yet
in p
lace
Law
s ar
ticu
late
a c
lear
req
uir
emen
t fo
r re
gist
rati
on, a
ccre
dita
tion
an
d m
onit
orin
g of
all
agen
cies
pro
vidi
ng
child
pro
tect
ion
ser
vice
s
Barriers to implementation
Pro
visi
on is
mad
e fo
r in
terv
enti
ons
aim
ed a
t st
ren
gth
enin
g pa
ren
ts’ a
bilit
y to
car
e fo
r an
d pr
otec
t th
eir
child
ren
, rat
her
th
an (
only
) re
stri
ctin
g pa
ren
tal r
igh
ts
Law
s in
clu
de s
tatu
tory
pro
visi
ons
mak
ing
it m
anda
tory
to
repo
rt a
ny
know
n o
r su
spec
ted
inci
den
ce o
f ch
ild m
altr
eatm
ent
to t
he
polic
e or
ch
ild w
elfa
re a
uth
orit
y
Foc
us
on p
reve
nti
on, e
arly
inte
rven
tion
an
d re
spon
se s
ervi
ces
Law
s ar
ticu
late
th
e pa
ren
ts r
espo
nsi
bilit
ies
and
the
Stat
e's
oblig
atio
ns
Ch
ild
Pro
tect
ion
La
w
Tra
ffic
kin
g
Lab
our
Dom
esti
c vi
olen
ce
Le
ga
l a
nd
re
gu
lato
ry f
ram
ew
ork
e.g.
In
stit
uti
onal
car
e
Cle
ar, e
nfo
rcea
ble
min
imu
m s
tan
dard
s fo
r ch
ild p
rote
ctio
n s
ervi
ces
e.g.
inte
r-ag
ency
rep
orti
ng
and
refe
rral
gu
idel
ines
or
MO
Us
Foc
us
on in
vest
igat
ive
proc
ess,
case
re
ferr
al a
nd
man
agem
ent
mec
han
ism
s an
d pr
oced
ure
s fo
r th
e re
scu
e an
d re
mov
al o
f ch
ildre
nL
aws
outl
ine
the
auth
orit
y an
d pr
oced
ure
s fo
r in
terv
enti
on b
y th
e ch
ild p
rote
ctio
n
auth
orit
y to
pre
ven
t or
res
pon
d to
ch
ildre
n a
t ri
sk
Gen
eral
law
th
at
reco
gnis
es c
hild
ren
's
righ
t to
pro
tect
ion
Des
crib
es t
he
deliv
ery
of
prev
enti
on a
nd
resp
onse
(w
elfa
re
and
just
ice)
to
child
ren
an
d fa
mili
es
Pro
hib
it a
ll fo
rms
of v
iole
nce
, abu
se a
nd
expl
oita
tion
of
child
ren
Det
aile
d pr
ovis
ion
s on
th
e au
thor
ity
for
child
pr
otec
tion
ser
vice
s an
d th
e pr
oces
s an
d pr
oced
ure
s fo
r in
terv
enin
g to
pro
tect
a
child
Law
s ar
e fr
amed
in r
igh
ts-b
ased
lan
guag
e an
d in
clu
de a
sta
tem
ent
of c
hild
ren
’s r
igh
ts
Law
s in
corp
orat
e C
RC
gu
idin
g pr
inci
ples
su
ch a
s be
st in
tere
sts
of t
he
child
, non
-di
scri
min
atio
n a
nd
child
par
tici
pati
on a
nd
resp
ect
for
thei
r vi
ews
in d
ecis
ion
mak
ing
Law
s gi
ve t
he
child
wel
fare
age
ncy
th
e re
spon
sibi
lity
to r
ecei
ve a
nd
inve
stig
ate
con
cern
s ab
out
child
ren
in n
eed
of p
rote
ctio
n a
nd
to a
pply
to
the
cou
rt f
or a
pro
tect
ion
ord
er w
her
en
eces
sary
En
forc
eabl
e re
gula
tion
or
decr
ee w
ith
cl
ear
mec
han
ism
s fo
r ac
cou
tabi
lity,
m
onit
orin
g an
d en
forc
emen
t
Imp
lem
enta
tio
n o
f la
ws
Law
s sp
ecif
y w
ho
is t
o ta
ke a
ctio
n a
nd
how
dec
isio
ns
are
to b
e m
ade,
incl
udi
ng
legi
slat
ed
proc
edu
res
for
rece
ivin
g an
d re
spon
din
g to
con
cern
s ab
out
child
ren
at
risk
or
in n
eed
of
prot
ecti
on
Cri
min
al
Co
de
Pro
tect
ion
mea
sure
s fo
r ch
ildre
n a
re c
onta
ined
in t
he
over
all c
hild
pro
tect
ion
law
rat
her
th
an s
catt
ered
acr
oss
mu
ltip
le is
sue-
spec
ific
law
s, p
olic
ies
and
nat
ion
al p
lan
s of
act
ion
Aw
aren
ess
of la
ws
App
ropr
iate
hu
man
res
ourc
es
App
ropr
iate
fin
anci
al r
esou
rces
Th
e la
ws
are
asse
ssed
to
be r
ealis
tic
and
appr
opri
ate
in t
he
nat
ion
al
con
text
an
d cu
ltu
re
Law
s in
clu
de c
lear
, sta
nda
rdis
ed p
roce
dure
s fo
r a
child
’s p
rogr
ess
thro
ugh
th
e ch
ild
prot
ecti
on s
yste
m a
nd
deta
iled
guid
ance
on
th
e cr
iter
ia, p
roce
dure
s an
d m
inim
um
st
anda
rds
for
loca
tin
g, a
sses
smen
t, r
efer
ral,
care
pla
nn
ing,
mon
itor
ing
and
reco
rd
keep
ing
148
UNICEF World Trade Center 6, 10th Floor Jl. Jenderal Sudirman Kav. 31 Jakarta 12920, Indonesia
Tel. (021) 2996 8000
Fax. (021) 571 1326
Email [email protected]
Website www.unicef.or.id
unicefindonesia @unicefindonesia
Formative Evaluation
UNICEF’s ChIld ProTECTIoN sysTEm BUIldINg APProACh IN INdoNEsIA
UNICEF World Trade Center 6, 10th Floor Jl. Jenderal Sudirman Kav. 31 Jakarta 12920, Indonesia
Tel. (021) 2996 8000
Fax. (021) 571 1326
Email [email protected]
Website www.unicef.or.id
unicefindonesia @unicefindonesia
Formative Evaluation
UNICEF’s ChIld ProTECTIoN sysTEm BUIldINg APProACh IN INdoNEsIA